In September, New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham issued a “public health emergency order” that aimed to suspend the right to bear arms in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. However, the response was not quite what she expected. Instead of praise, fellow Democrats pointed out that her ban directly conflicted with the U.S. Supreme Court’s Second Amendment precedents. A federal judge further reinforced this point by issuing a temporary restraining order (TRO) that prevents the enforcement of Lujan Grisham’s order. The move to suspend gun rights was not seen as a bold step against the “epidemic” of gun violence, but rather a violation of constitutional rights.
In a recent Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), U.S. District Judge David H. Urias, who was appointed by President Joe Biden, pointed out that the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen is likely to govern the present case. The case combines lawsuits from numerous Bernalillo County residents and various gun rights groups. The Court had turned down New York’s policy that required residents to show “proper cause” before publicly carrying guns for self-defense, in the Bruen case. The justices concluded that the Second Amendment “presumptively guarantees” the right to bear arms in public, necessitating New York to establish that its policy was “consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”
According to the Court, New York was unable to pass the test. Justice Clarence Thomas, speaking for the majority, stated that “with the exception of some jurisdictions in the late 19th century, American governments have not widely banned the public carrying of firearms commonly used for personal defense.” However, this was precisely what Lujan Grisham aimed to accomplish. Urias stated that “based on the directives and decisions of this Supreme Court precedent,” the plaintiffs have demonstrated a high probability of success in their Second Amendment argument.
It was common knowledge that Lujan Grisham was aware of the legal implications of her actions. She even went as far as to present her order as a challenge to the “current court actions” that were being guided by Bruen, which suggested that the Second Amendment was an absolute right. However, her emphasis on the word “absoluteness” was nothing but a distraction. The decisions that she found offensive did not claim that every gun regulation was unconstitutional. Moreover, her order blatantly disobeyed a Supreme Court decision that was directly relevant to the matter, as Urias was quick to acknowledge.
Five days following the issuance of her order, Governor Lujan Grisham faced a Temporary Restraining Order. The order was in response to her threat of imposing fines of up to $5,000 on Bernalillo County residents, including those with concealed carry permits, for exercising a right that is explicitly recognized by the Supreme Court. The move by the governor was widely criticized, even by those who may have otherwise supported her agenda.
According to the Santa Fe New Mexican, Albuquerque Police Chief Harold Medina has stated that he will not be enforcing the gun order. His stance was supported by Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller, who clarified that the Albuquerque Police Department is not responsible for enforcing the governor’s ban. However, the officers will continue to enforce all criminal laws, combat gun violence, and work towards achieving justice.
After Lujan Grisham issued her order, Bernalillo County Sheriff John Allen, who is also a Democrat, expressed his concerns in a statement. “The temporary ban challenges the foundation of our Constitution, which I swore an oath to uphold,” he said. He also expressed his reservations about putting his deputies in situations that could lead to civil liability conflicts while prohibiting law-abiding citizens from exercising their constitutional right to self-defense.
During a press conference on Monday, Allen made it clear that his deputies would not be enforcing Lujan Grisham’s order, which he called “unconstitutional.” According to him, the order would not be effective in reducing gun violence, but instead would penalize law-abiding citizens who were exercising their constitutional right of self-defense. Allen stated that he only found out about the order minutes before it was released and emphasized that it was solely Lujan Grisham’s decision as law enforcement did not agree with it.
Despite defying Bruen, Lujan Grisham stood by her decision, acknowledging that it would not affect the behavior of criminals. Although Sheriff Allen criticized her edict, she responded to him with contempt. She admitted that she did not require a lecture on constitutionality from him, but rather action. According to her, what was needed was for leaders to stand up for the victims of violent crime.
According to the governor, Allen has not fulfilled his duties in this matter. The governor highlighted that they have implemented sensible gun legislation, which includes red flag laws, protections against domestic violence, a ban on straw purchases, and laws for safe storage. They have also allocated hundreds of millions of dollars to assist law enforcement agencies in recruiting and retaining officers. Additionally, they have increased penalties for violent criminals and provided substantial support to intervention programs. The governor emphasized that they have provided all the necessary tools to Sheriff Allen, and it’s time for him to take action. The governor strongly stated that she will not back down from doing what’s right and will always prioritize the safety of the people of New Mexico.
Not just Allen, but other Democrats also expressed their concerns about Lujan Grisham’s position. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) affirmed his support for gun safety laws on September 9th but stated that the governor’s order defies the U.S. Constitution. According to him, there is no exception for any state public health emergency. David Hogg, a gun control activist, shared Lieu’s opinion.
In a few days, Raúl Torrez, a Democratic attorney general from New Mexico, voiced out his disagreement with the Emergency Order. He conveyed his message to Lujan Grisham through a letter and stated that he did not think the order would have a significant impact on public safety. He also expressed his doubts about its constitutionality and informed her that his office would not defend the order. Torrez’s statement adds to the growing number of critics who have expressed their reservations about the Emergency Order.
The editorial board of the Albuquerque Journal also weighed in on the issue. They expressed their disagreement with the governor’s decision to “break the law” under the guise of “fighting crime.” In their critique of Lujan Grisham, the board criticized her for misusing the emergency public health powers that were granted to her administration by state lawmakers after the 9/11 attack. They pointed out that the governor has put herself in a difficult position both legally and politically, and that there is no easy way out of it.
The American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico, as expected, did not come forward to defend the Second Amendment. However, the organization expressed concern over Governor Lujan Grisham’s potential use of emergency powers as it could result in excessive policing and unnecessary imprisonment. In a statement, the ACLU of New Mexico stated that they are worried about the possibility of overzealous policing and senseless incarceration due to the Governor’s public health order.
In a recent column for the Santa Fe New Mexican, Milan Simonich expressed concern that Governor Lujan Grisham’s recent gun ban would have negative consequences for causes she supports. Simonich argued that the ban was a fight the governor could not win and that it provided an easy avenue for Republicans to criticize her. He went on to suggest that the ban was unconstitutional and that it was likely to be challenged in court. Simonich also noted that the governor’s overreach had alienated some of her supporters, who would otherwise be in favor of her efforts to improve policing and drug treatment programs.
According to Simonich, while Lujan Grisham’s executive order aims to disarm law-abiding citizens, it fails to address the fact that criminals will continue to carry guns regardless of the order. This means that the order is essentially meaningless when it comes to enforcing laws against those who break them. Simonich believes that the governor’s focus on generating attention through this order is misplaced, as it takes away from the issue of enforcement and instead creates a new target in the form of the governor herself.
Last Friday, Governor Lujan Grisham made an announcement that she had updated the public health order. This came two days after Urias’ blocking of her gun decree. The updated order includes the temporary suspension of carrying firearms at parks and playgrounds in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. The previous provision around firearms has been removed and replaced with this new provision. However, the Governor did not mention anything regarding the TRO or the Second Amendment.
Governor Lujan Grisham is determined to use all resources at her disposal to put an end to the public health emergency with the urgency it requires. She firmly believes that the status quo is unacceptable and will continue to push for action until the crisis is resolved.
In the press release of the governor, a statement from Javier Martínez, the House Speaker of New Mexico, was included. He expressed his desire for his family, as well as all residents of the state, to feel secure and proud of their home. He emphasized that their dedication to resolving these concerns is both heartfelt and unwavering and that any political distractions will not deter them from collaborating with city, county, and state leaders and law enforcement to implement effective solutions for safer communities.
According to Martínez, the recent “politics of the day” was not about partisanship, but a reaction to the governor’s attempt to govern through emergency powers. These powers were so overly broad that they allowed her to violate a clearly established constitutional right. Her failure to succeed and the subsequent criticism she faced is a positive indication that Americans from all sides of the political spectrum recognize the dangers of unchecked authoritarianism. This is a promising sign for the future of American democracy.
More News:
- Breaking News: Dangerous shootout outside of Albuquerque apartment complex
- Man Convicted for Driving Away from Hit-and-Run with Body on Vehicle
