Michelle Lujan Grisham

Scandal-plagued Lujan Grisham teases 2028 presidential run

Far-left New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has expressed interest in pursuing the Democratic nomination for the presidency in 2028. Speaking at Harvard University’s Kennedy School, the two-term governor stated, “I’m worried about my country, and I’m worried about my planet. If you really are in that position on any of those things, then that’s a call to action in whatever way any of us can be useful.”​

Lujan Grisham emphasized the need for increased female representation in politics, noting that women should hold elected offices proportional to their percentage in the population. She remarked, “I’d like to see more women elected… if we’re going to really uphold a fragile democracy… then you have to represent the people in the right ways, which means 54%-plus are women.”​

However, her tenure as governor has been marked by several controversies. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Lujan Grisham implemented strict lockdown measures, asserting that such actions were necessary to curb the virus’s spread. She stated, “Expansive lockdowns were necessary to keep COVID-19 at bay.” These measures faced criticism from various quarters, including business owners and civil liberties advocates, who questioned their impact and constitutionality. ​

Adding to the controversies, in October 2021, it was revealed that Lujan Grisham’s campaign paid $150,000 to settle a sexual harassment claim. A former campaign spokesman accused her of pouring water on his crotch and then grabbing his genitals through his clothes during a staff meeting. The governor’s office denied the allegations but claimed it opted for a settlement to avoid prolonged litigation. ​

In September 2023, Lujan Grisham issued an emergency public health order suspending the right to carry firearms in public in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County, citing recent shootings involving children. This directive was met with immediate legal challenges. U.S. District Judge David Urias temporarily blocked the order, stating that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their case, referencing constitutional rights. ​

Furthermore, Lujan Grisham has faced criticism from within her own party. Her approaches to tackling addiction, mental illness, and violence have led to clashes with fellow Democrats. In December 2024, she advocated for measures compelling mentally ill and drug-addicted individuals to receive treatment, a stance that sparked debate and highlighted divisions within the party. ​
As lame duck Governor Lujan Grisham contemplates a potential presidential run, these incidents from her gubernatorial tenure are likely to be scrutinized, shaping both public perception and her political trajectory.

Scandal-plagued Lujan Grisham teases 2028 presidential run Read More »

Governor floats special session after shooting, signaling another gun grab

Following a tragic mass shooting at Young Park in Las Cruces, where three individuals were killed and 15 others injured, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham expressed deep frustration over the limited public safety legislation passed during the recent 60-day legislative session. ​

In a press conference held in the Cabinet Room, Governor Lujan Grisham highlighted that only a small fraction of the 270 bills addressing crime and public safety reached her desk, stating, “I cannot ignore that we failed to adequately address the public safety crisis in our state.” ​

The governor emphasized the absence of productive debates on juvenile crime, noting that even a “weakened, watered-down juvenile crime approach” failed to pass in the Senate. ​

Despite holding numerous town halls across New Mexico to gather public input on crime concerns, Lujan Grisham expressed bewilderment at lawmakers’ reluctance to act, asserting that “accountability is missing in New Mexico and has been for quite some time.” ​

While acknowledging the passage of a minor crime package and several “behavioral health” reforms, the governor recalled a previous commitment from lawmakers to do more, suggesting that the session’s outcomes did not align with that promise. ​

Lujan Grisham criticized certain legislative committees for hindering progress on public safety bills, referencing statements from committee chairs about intentionally delaying these bills. ​

The recent shooting in Las Cruces, involving multiple shooters and resulting in numerous casualties, has intensified discussions on gun violence and crime within the state. ​

In response, Governor Lujan Grisham is considering convening a special legislative session to address these pressing public safety issues, emphasizing the need for input from district attorneys, law enforcement, and affected families. ​This would inevitably include more gun grabs, which would be a detriment to the state’s citizens.

Republican leaders have expressed support for a special session focused on crime and healthcare. However, House Speaker Javier Martínez cautioned that such sessions require substantial preparatory work to be effective, stating that rushing into a special session without adequate preparation could be “a waste of taxpayer dollars, and quite frankly, it’s a waste of people’s time.”

Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth echoed this sentiment, emphasizing that “special sessions don’t work if the bills aren’t cooked.”

There is concern among some that under the guise of addressing crime, the governor may attempt to introduce measures that could infringe upon the rights of law-abiding gun owners. Proposals such as the “Gas-Operated Semiautomatic Firearms Exclusion Act” have been introduced in the past, aiming to prohibit the importation, sale, manufacture, transfer, receipt, or possession of certain gas-operated semiautomatic firearms and large-capacity ammunition feeding devices. ​

Additionally, there have been discussions about holding the firearms industry accountable through litigation related to “unfair trade practices,” a concept that faced challenges in the previous legislative session. ​

Governor floats special session after shooting, signaling another gun grab Read More »

MLG freaks out after reports of Trump plan for ‘buffer zone’ on NM border

President Donald Trump is reportedly advancing a proposal to establish a military-controlled buffer zone along the U.S.-Mexico border, with a specific focus on New Mexico.

The concept would effectively convert part of the border in New Mexico into a militarized zone, where soldiers could detain migrants who cross into the area, similar to how trespassers are handled on military bases.

The Washington Post reports that the plan has been under discussion for several weeks and would likely introduce additional legal challenges for individuals attempting to enter the U.S. unlawfully.

Under the proposal, the military zone would extend 60 feet deep along the border, placing it directly under military jurisdiction.

Far-left Democrat New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham responded Thursday, sharply criticizing the idea. “The president’s decision to create a deportation buffer zone along New Mexico’s border is a waste of resources and military personnel,” she stated.

Thus far, neither the Pentagon, the Department of Homeland Security, nor the White House has issued formal comments on the plan. However, an increased military presence has been observed at the border. The presence has resulted in the lowest number of illegal crossers, which is a stark contrast to the border under Joe Biden.

Video footage shows soldiers from the 4th Infantry Division out of Fort Carson, Colorado, arriving at Fort Bliss in El Paso, Texas, for what has been described as a “border mission” in collaboration with the Department of Homeland Security.

Elsewhere, former acting ICE director and current border czar Tom Homan joined Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and other officials in Florida for an immigration-focused event on Thursday.

Homan reiterated his belief that birthright citizenship fuels illegal immigration, urging the Supreme Court to revisit the issue. “I’m not a lawyer, but I can read, and I don’t think it’s clear that a child born in this country is automatically a U.S. citizen,” Homan remarked.

MLG freaks out after reports of Trump plan for ‘buffer zone’ on NM border Read More »

NM Supreme Court partially upholds MLG’s unconstitutional gun edict

A sharply divided New Mexico Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that far-left Democrat Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s 2023 emergency orders restricting gun possession and addressing drug abuse did not violate state law. However, the court did strike down a provision related to a juvenile justice initiative, deeming it an overreach of executive authority.

In a 3-2 decision, the majority of the court determined that Lujan Grisham’s orders fell within the broad emergency powers granted to governors under state law. This ruling has raised serious concerns regarding the extent of executive authority, with Justices Brianna Zamora and Michael Vigil dissenting. Zamora issued a strong warning about the potential for future abuse, stating, “While the governor’s desire to combat gun violence and drug abuse appears to be well-intended, there is nothing in the majority’s opinion that would restrict a future governor from taking actions that would be substantively more troubling.”

This ruling is significant not only because of its implications for executive power but also due to the makeup of the court itself— a majority of justices were appointed by Lujan Grisham. This raises questions about the objectivity of the decision and whether judicial independence has been compromised in favor of political loyalty.

Despite the court’s decision, the practical impact is limited, as the governor’s emergency orders have either expired or been blocked by federal courts. Nonetheless, the ruling sets a dangerous precedent, allowing future governors to invoke emergency powers in sweeping ways, potentially infringing on constitutional rights.

Lujan Grisham initially justified her emergency orders after the tragic killing of an 11-year-old boy in Albuquerque, declaring gun violence and drug abuse public health crises. She subsequently attempted to ban firearm possession in public spaces within Albuquerque and Bernalillo County and mandated wastewater testing in schools for fentanyl and other drugs. The gun restrictions were swiftly challenged and blocked by a Joe Biden-appointed federal judge, leading her to revise the order to only cover parks and playgrounds. That order was allowed to expire in October 2024 and was not renewed.

The governor’s actions prompted legal challenges from a broad coalition, including the New Mexico Republican Party, GOP lawmakers, the state Libertarian Party, and the National Rifle Association. Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, state Republican Party Chairwoman Amy Barela warned of the dangerous precedent set by the decision, stating, “The dissenting justices’ warnings prove our point: without a check on this power, what’s next? Will a future Democratic governor declare an ‘emergency’ over climate change to seize property? Ban free speech to combat ‘misinformation’? The majority’s ruling says they can — and Democrats will.”

Lujan Grisham’s reliance on emergency powers has been a recurring theme of her administration, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic. Using the 2003 Public Health Emergency Response Act, which was originally enacted following the 2001 anthrax attacks, she repeatedly extended emergency declarations and issued sweeping public health mandates. Efforts by legislators to curb the governor’s authority have been unsuccessful, as she has vowed to veto any such measures.

The court’s ruling reinforces the unchecked expansion of executive power under the guise of public health emergencies, raising serious constitutional concerns. While Lujan Grisham’s orders may have technically adhered to state law, they undeniably tested the boundaries of individual rights and governmental overreach. The decision underscores the need for legislative reforms to ensure that emergency powers are not exploited to bypass constitutional protections and democratic processes.

NM Supreme Court partially upholds MLG’s unconstitutional gun edict Read More »

‘Justice and equity’: MLG taps 78-year-old progressive for vacant House seat

On Wednesday, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham appointed Martha Garcia, a 78-year-old former Cibola County Commissioner and president of the Ramah Navajo Chapter House, to fill the vacant New Mexico House District 6 seat following the passing of Rep. Eliseo Alcon.

The district, which covers Cibola and McKinley counties, including the Village of Milan, the Pueblo of Zuni, and parts of the Navajo Nation, has been unrepresented since late November when Alcon resigned due to declining health. Alcon, who was 74, passed away in January.

Progressive freshman State Sen. Angel Charley (D-Acoma), whose district overlaps with HD 6, called Garcia’s appointment “historic” and praised her commitment to advancing justice and equity. “Today’s appointment marks a significant milestone, not only for House District 6 but for the generations who have fought for a voice in decisions that shape our future,” Charley said in a statement. “Martha’s commitment to justice, equity, and the well-being of our people will serve as a guiding light in the legislature. I look forward to working alongside her to uplift our small towns and tribal communities in western New Mexico and protect the values we hold dear.”

Photo of Ms. Garcia via the Cibola County Commission website archive.

Garcia, known for her progressive stance on key issues, did not respond to voicemails requesting comment on Wednesday, according to reports.

Before Garcia’s selection, governing boards in Cibola and McKinley counties had nominated two other candidates for the seat, but residency investigations found one of them ineligible. The governor chose Garcia over former Rep. Harry Garcia and former state Sen. Clemente Sanchez after a charade attempting to deem Rep. Garcia ineligible. He is a more moderate Democrat versus the progressive Ms. Garcia.

Garcia’s swearing-in ceremony is tentatively scheduled for Thursday, officially marking the beginning of her tenure in the New Mexico House of Representatives.

‘Justice and equity’: MLG taps 78-year-old progressive for vacant House seat Read More »

Trump’s bold warning: NM faces financial Armageddon if MLG dares to defy

At a high-profile White House gathering of state leaders, President Donald Trump made his policy positions unmistakably clear. Among those in attendance was far-left Democrat New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham—a governor whose state relies heavily on federal funding and now faces a stark choice. New Mexico, one of the nation’s most federally dependent states, could see billions in federal aid vanish if it dares to defy Trump’s directives.

During the meeting of the National Governors Association, Trump reiterated his readiness to cut off federal dollars from any state that does not toe the line. This firm stance echoes the earlier showdown with Maine’s Gov. Janet Mills, who vowed to take legal action if federal funding were withheld. “Any time a public interaction like that takes place, it’s coming from a person who’s grounded in their values,” noted Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer—a sentiment that underscores the high stakes for states whose budgets are intricately tied to federal support.

Governor Lujan Grisham’s presence was a clear reminder that New Mexico’s financial well-being is on the line. Federal funds account for a substantial portion of the state’s annual budget, and analysts warn that any move to buck Trump’s policies could trigger cuts amounting to billions of dollars. For a state that depends on this support for critical services and infrastructure, such a loss would be devastating.

Throughout the discussions, some state leaders attempted to find common ground. Yet, the underlying message was unambiguous: challenging the Trump administration’s policies is not without serious consequences. “I got to put the people’s interests before my own interests, before my partisan interest. I got a job to do,” one governor declared, highlighting the heavy burden of leadership when federal dollars are at stake.

Supporters of President Trump argue that his decisive actions are necessary to maintain accountability and fiscal discipline across the country. In their view, Trump’s tough stance is not an overreach but a vital measure to ensure that states remain aligned with national priorities. 

For New Mexico, this means that Lujan Grisham must carefully weigh her policy choices. A refusal to cooperate could result in severe financial repercussions that would undermine state programs and services relied on by millions of New Mexicans.

In a political landscape where partisan idealism sometimes overshadows practical governance, the decision facing Lujan Grisham is clear. Aligning with Trump’s policies could secure New Mexico’s continued flow of federal support, while defiance may not only isolate the state from critical funding but also set a dangerous precedent for other Democrat-led states. With New Mexico’s fiscal future at a crossroads, the stakes could not be higher.

Trump’s bold warning: NM faces financial Armageddon if MLG dares to defy Read More »

Arrest warrants might just start flying at Dems in NM

New Mexico’s Democrat elected officials may soon find themselves in legal jeopardy for obstructing federal law enforcement efforts to protect the nation’s borders. An internal memo from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) indicates that state and local officials who interfere with immigration enforcement could face criminal prosecution.

The document makes it clear that federal prosecutors are being instructed to identify and potentially charge those who “threaten to impede” federal immigration actions. This could mean serious legal consequences for public officials in sanctuary cities like Santa Fe and Albuquerque, where local authorities have actively refused to cooperate with immigration enforcement.

“It’s hard on people when there is an atmosphere of fear and unknown action,” said Alan Webber, the mayor of Santa Fe. However, his city’s policies of shielding illegal immigrants from federal enforcement may now carry serious legal risks.

Mayor Webber admitted, “I don’t know any mayor is in a position, including me, to say that we are going to refuse to comply with the law. But I don’t know if we are required to assist with things that go beyond our legal responsibilities.”

The DOJ’s directive raises serious questions about whether officials like Webber and Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller could be subject to arrest warrants for their defiance of federal law. Keller, in a statement, seemed to double down on resistance:

“As your Mayor, I was elected to lead our city, not work for Donald Trump… APD officers will continue to arrest violent and repeat offenders, regardless of immigration status.”

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham also weighed in, appearing to reject the DOJ’s position, stating, “I expect New Mexico’s public officials to uphold the Constitution and their duties under law, and not be swayed or intimidated by politically motivated threats.”

New Mexico’s Attorney General, Raúl Torrez, dismissed the DOJ’s warning, calling it a distortion of the law and an attack on state and local officials. His position raises further concerns about whether he and other high-ranking state officials could be complicit in efforts to obstruct federal immigration enforcement.

Sam Bregman, the district attorney for Bernalillo County, took an even more defiant stance, outright refusing to cooperate with federal immigration efforts:

“In my roles as District Attorney as well as the Chairman of the OCC, I will continue to vigorously work with all agencies to go after criminals in our state. However, I will in no way assist with the recent executive orders involving immigration.”

These statements, combined with the DOJ’s new directive, highlight the increasing legal risks facing New Mexico’s Democrat officials. If they continue to shield illegal immigrants and block federal law enforcement from carrying out its duty, they could very well find themselves facing warrants for their arrests. The coming weeks may determine whether New Mexico’s leadership chooses to comply with federal law or risk legal action for their defiance.

Arrest warrants might just start flying at Dems in NM Read More »

Teachers’ union rips MLG over latest incendiary comments

In a recent development, the American Federation of Teachers New Mexico (AFT NM) has openly criticized Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham for her remarks concerning educators serving in the state legislature. 

The governor reportedly described it as “unethical and a huge conflict of interest” for current and former educators to vote on education-related matters, suggesting that such individuals have hindered educational reforms. She was quoted saying, “You’ve got a lot of former educators and superintendents who aren’t interested in changing anything.”

In response, AFT NM expressed profound disappointment, emphasizing the value of educators’ firsthand experience in legislative processes. The union stated, “Lawmaking and policy work take teamwork and trust, not criticism.”

This incident is not the first instance of tension between the governor and educators. Previously, the National Education Association of New Mexico (NEA-NM) opposed a state rule mandating a 180-day school year, which was set to take effect on July 1, 2024. 

NEA-NM President Mary Parr-Sánchez voiced concerns that the rule would drive educators out of the profession and erode local control over school calendars. She remarked, “There is a great majority of people that believe that would not be in the best interest of children, because it’s going to drive educators out of the field.” 

The rule faced significant opposition from educators and administrators, leading to legal challenges. In February 2025, a New Mexico district judge ruled that the Public Education Department’s mandate for a 180-day instructional calendar was unlawful and unenforceable. The court found that the department had exceeded its authority and that the rule conflicted with existing state laws, which emphasize local flexibility in meeting instructional hour requirements. 

These events highlight ongoing debates in New Mexico regarding the balance between state mandates and local control in educational policy and the executive’s ability to keep her former supporters (such as teachers’ unions) in her camp as her tenure as governor wanes. 

Teachers’ union rips MLG over latest incendiary comments Read More »

MLG’s power grab comes back to bite—Now she’s begging for ‘moderates’

Far-left Democrat Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham is taking aim at lawmakers in her own party as her agenda on crime and education struggles to gain traction in the first quarter of the legislative session. Expressing frustration, she criticized legislators for failing to take decisive action on key issues and accused them of being too risk-averse to address the state’s problems.

Lujan Grisham singled out public safety as an area where she believes lawmakers have fallen short. She argued that violent crime is a statewide issue, not just an Albuquerque problem, pointing to rising crime rates in cities like Las Cruces, Santa Fe, Alamogordo, and Raton. The governor pushed for mandatory sentencing for certain crimes and blamed some judges for failing to keep criminals off the streets under discretionary sentencing. Despite calling a special session on crime last year, most of her proposals went nowhere, leaving her frustrated with the Legislature’s inaction. She insisted that lawmakers need to be more aggressive in tackling crime rather than remaining politically cautious.

Some legislators have pushed back against the idea that increasing penalties will reduce crime. Senator Joseph Cervantes, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, recently stated that enforcement and accountability, rather than new laws, are what’s missing. Pretrial detention has remained a controversial issue since New Mexico moved away from a money-based bail system in 2016. While the governor has pointed to repeat offenders being released and committing new crimes, studies from the University of New Mexico indicate that most individuals released pretrial do not reoffend. Still, Lujan Grisham defended her push for stricter measures, arguing that longer jail sentences prevent criminals from engaging in more wrongdoing.

In addition to crime policy, Lujan Grisham expressed frustration with how public education funding is handled. She claimed there is a lack of transparency in how more than $4 billion in state funds are spent and that her administration has little power over school districts. 

She also took a direct swipe at the House and Senate education committees, which are both led by current or retired teachers, saying they have stalled meaningful reform efforts. “You’ve got a lot of former educators and superintendents who aren’t interested in changing anything,” she said.

She described it as “unethical and a huge conflict of interest” for educators to be making decisions on education policy and funding while serving in the Legislature.

Representative G. Andrés Romero, chairman of the House Education Committee, rejected the governor’s criticism, arguing that having teachers in the Legislature provides valuable firsthand experience. He defended his role, saying his time in the classroom informs his legislative decisions, and expressed disappointment that the governor views it as a conflict.

As the legislative session continues, tensions between Lujan Grisham and lawmakers appear to be escalating. She blamed progressive members for being too entrenched in their positions, arguing that New Mexico needs more moderate leadership. 

“Maybe we need more pragmatic, moderate people (in elected office), because you can’t govern on the fringes or the extremes, which is how New Mexico got into a lot of these problems,” said Lujan Grisham. 

Ironically, the governor worked overtime to primary challenge more moderate members of her party because they did not fall in lockstep with her radical agenda on banning guns, having abortions up to the date of birth, and reckless spending. She helped take out the moderate former Senate President Pro-Tem, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the chairman of the Legislative Veterans and Military Affairs Committee, and rank-and-file representatives and senators from across the state. In another turn of irony, these same moderate legislators would have helped pass her crime agenda, but now they are replaced by radical progressives. 

MLG’s power grab comes back to bite—Now she’s begging for ‘moderates’ Read More »

In embarrassing blow to MLG, judge strikes down overreaching education rule

Far-left Democrat Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s New Mexico Public Education Department’s (PED) proposed “180-day rule” has been officially struck down. Fifth Judicial District Judge Dustin Hunter ruled on Monday that the department’s mandate for all public school districts and charter schools to implement a 180-day instructional calendar “does not align with the Legislature’s clear intention.”

“The PED lacks the authority to implement a rule mandating a minimum number of instructional days for public school districts and charter schools,” Hunter stated in his decision.

The ruling comes after over a year of opposition from school administrators, educators, and lawmakers who challenged the agency’s authority to impose such a requirement.

The controversy began in May 2024, when a coalition of New Mexico school superintendents filed a lawsuit against NMPED, arguing that the mandate constituted “executive overreach.” The lawsuit, backed by over 50 school districts, claimed that enforcing a 180-day school calendar would eliminate four-day school weeks, which are widely used in rural communities.

Stan Rounds, executive director of the New Mexico School Superintendents Association, previously warned that under the new rule, “If you do a four-day week under the new rule, you essentially will have to go to school about 49 of those 52 weeks.”

Superintendent Johnna Bruhn of Mosquero Municipal Schools voiced concerns about the logistical and financial burdens the rule would impose. “The issue is, it’s going to be an increase in travel time and an increase in costs and an increase in the burden on the students and the staff,” Bruhn explained.

Parents and community members also objected to the change. Ronald Dixon, a grandparent of students in Grady, opposed the extended schedule, saying, “I just totally object to it because they don’t give the kids an opportunity to rest, as well as the teachers, and give everybody a break.”

Despite widespread opposition, NMPED defended the 180-day mandate, citing improved student performance in districts that voluntarily adopted extended calendars. Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham also backed the policy, arguing that increasing instructional days would help boost academic outcomes across the state.

However, the court ultimately rejected the department’s arguments, ruling that the mandate conflicted with a state law passed in 2023, which sets instructional requirements at 1,140 hours per year but does not specify a required number of school days.

In his ruling, Judge Hunter emphasized that the Legislature, not the Public Education Department, holds the power to set educational policies. He also pointed to the repeal of a 2009 law that originally established a 180-day requirement, noting that lawmakers had intentionally chosen not to reinstate such a mandate.

Furthermore, the judge highlighted that PED delayed implementing the rule for over a decade, suggesting that even the department had doubts about its own authority. This delay was acknowledged in a December communication to the Legislative Finance Committee.

As a result, the court issued a preliminary injunction, preventing the enforcement of the 180-day requirement and directing NMPED to approve school budgets that comply with existing legal standards.

The court has given both parties ten days to submit additional findings supporting the decision. A scheduling discussion has also been set for Wednesday at 1:00 p.m. to address the case’s next steps.

With the ruling now in place, New Mexico school districts can continue operating under their current calendars without being forced to adopt a longer school year.

In embarrassing blow to MLG, judge strikes down overreaching education rule Read More »

Scroll to Top