NM Dems have panic attack because Hull says he will talk to other governors

New Mexico Democrats are sounding the alarm over Republican gubernatorial candidate Gregg Hull after he suggested he would work with other governors in the region, including Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, on policy — a prospect that apparently has the Democratic Party of New Mexico in full fundraising panic.

In a recent DPNM email, Democrats attacked Hull as a “MAGA Mayor” — despite his very middle of the road approach — and claimed he had “revealed his opposition to abortion access in New Mexico.” The party cited a New Mexico Political Report article and accused Hull of saying he would not support New Mexico’s status as a “safe haven” for abortion and would work with Abbott to “prevent Texans from being able to access abortion and reproductive care in New Mexico,” a stretch of a claim. 

The email went further, warning supporters that “there’s no doubt” Hull would try to undo New Mexico’s abortion policies and claiming he would put “patients and providers” at risk. There is likely no chance of such policy, since far-left, pro-abortion Democrats control both chambers of the state legislature.

But the panic says more about Democrats than it does about Hull.

The Democratic email treats any conversation with a neighboring Republican governor as an existential threat, as if Hull merely speaking with Abbott means New Mexico would automatically adopt every Texas policy overnight. That is the political leap Democrats want donors to make: Hull talks to Abbott, therefore New Mexico loses everything. They never claimed this the numerous times current Democrat Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham has collaborated with the likes of California Gov. Gavin Newsom or Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker, both Democrats.

The email also reveals how central abortion has become to Democrats’ 2026 playbook. Rather than defending New Mexico’s extreme abortion regime on the merits, DPNM is trying to scare supporters into donating by claiming Hull would destroy “reproductive freedom” and end New Mexico’s status as an abortion destination.

That “safe haven” status is exactly the problem for pro-life New Mexicans.

New Mexico has the most permissive abortion laws in the country. Guttmacher lists New Mexico as a state where abortion is “not restricted based on gestational duration,” and other abortion-access guides likewise describe abortion as legal throughout pregnancy in the state.

That means New Mexico has no gestational limit — no 15-week limit, no 20-week limit, no viability limit, and no general late-term ban. That is abortion up to birth.

Democrats do not like that phrase, but the policy reality is clear: New Mexico law does not set a gestational cutoff.

The state has also moved aggressively to block local communities from restricting abortion. The New Mexico Supreme Court struck down local abortion restrictions in conservative cities and counties, holding that state law precludes local governments from regulating abortion clinics or limiting abortion access. AP reported the ruling reinforced New Mexico’s position as a state with some of the most liberal abortion laws in the country.

Democrats call that “protecting access.” Conservatives call it wiping out local protections.

DPNM’s email insists New Mexico has “stepped up” to protect patients and providers. But the abortion industry’s record in New Mexico is not spotless.

The most notorious example is Keisha Atkins, a 23-year-old woman who died after a late-term abortion in Albuquerque. The Albuquerque Journal reported that UNM Health Sciences Center and Southwestern Women’s Options agreed to pay her estate a combined $1.26 million to settle a wrongful death and medical malpractice lawsuit. The lawsuit alleged providers failed to identify, diagnose and treat signs of sepsis during the abortion process.

Another lawsuit, filed by Nichole Atkins, alleged she went to Southwestern Women’s Options in 2010, signed consent forms related to abortion and fetal tissue use, and later claimed injuries from the abortion that left her unable to bear children. Court-linked complaint materials say she alleged the clinic did not properly disclose its relationship with UNM and did not fully inform her about use of fetal tissue.

A separate case involving Jessica Duran accused Southwestern Women’s Options of deception over fetal tissue and UNM research; New Mexico Alliance for Life reported that a district judge allowed Duran’s claims to proceed after denying a motion to dismiss. There are many others, including those pending.

Those cases are exactly why Democrats’ “safe haven” language deserves scrutiny. Safe for whom?

New Mexico Democrats have built a system with no gestational limit, no parental involvement requirement, taxpayer-funded abortion through Medicaid, strong state protections for abortion providers, and preemption against local pro-life ordinances. The Center for Reproductive Rights notes that New Mexico repealed its pre-Roe ban, repealed parental consent, repealed the physician-only surgical abortion restriction, and in 2026 repealed abortion reporting requirements.

Pro-lifers also point to repeated failed attempts to pass born-alive protections in New Mexico. A 2024 legislative analysis noted federal law recognizes a fetus that survives an abortion as a human being who must be cared for, while New Mexico criminal statutes have been applied to infant deaths after birth. But specific state-level born-alive abortion survivor protections have still not become law.

That is the backdrop Democrats do not want to discuss.

Instead, DPNM is trying to turn Hull’s comments about working with Abbott into a fundraising emergency. The email calls Abbott’s policies “extreme,” labels Hull “anti-choice,” and urges supporters to donate to elect Democrats such as Deb Haaland.

The message is obvious: Democrats know New Mexico’s abortion laws are far outside the mainstream, so they are trying to frame any effort to add limits, transparency, or cooperation with neighboring states as an attack on “healthcare.”

But voters may see it differently.

Many New Mexicans may support some abortion access while still opposing abortion without gestational limits, abortion tourism, taxpayer-funded procedures, lack of parental involvement, and a system where high-profile lawsuits have raised serious questions about patient safety.

Hull’s position gives voters a chance to debate whether New Mexico should remain the abortion capital of the Southwest — or whether the state should finally consider protections for unborn babies, mothers, local communities, and taxpayers.

No wonder Democrats are panicking.