New Mexico Referendum Project aims to repeal six progressive laws using state constitution rights.

A Grassroots Movement Challenges Threatening Laws in New Mexico

A powerful ⁣grassroots movement in New ⁢Mexico​ is taking a stand against six laws recently passed by the state legislature. These laws, according to the organizers ​of the movement, pose a threat to​ their communities, infringe upon parental rights, ⁣and compromise ⁤the integrity of the election process.

Larry Marker, an independent oil and gas producer and member of the Referendum Project, which ⁣initiated ​the movement, expressed the growing realization among people that their beloved state has changed. “People‍ are starting to ‌realize that this is ​not the state that they grew up in,” he ‍told The Epoch ⁤Times.

The Referendum Project, a nonpartisan ​organization, is supported by Article IV, ⁣Section 1 of the state constitution, which grants citizens the right to ⁣challenge and nullify any law enacted by the legislature, ‍except for specific ⁣cases related to ‍public⁢ peace, health, safety, and other essential ⁣matters.

Related Stories

New⁢ Mexico Governor Flouts 2nd Amendment

9/14/2023

New ⁣Mexico Governor Responds After‌ Federal Court Puts Her 30-Day Gun Carry Ban on Hold

9/14/2023

Among the laws ⁣that the​ movement opposes are HB 7:⁤ “Reproductive & Gender-Affirming Health Care,” SB 397: “School-Based Health Centers,” and SB 13: “Reproductive Health Provider Protections.” These laws collectively undermine a parent’s right to be involved in their child’s healthcare.

Carla⁢ Sonntag, CEO ‌of Better Together New Mexico, the organization‍ supporting‌ the Referendum Project, highlighted the concerning implications of ⁢these laws. She explained, “Imagine a young child deciding to change their gender and having the ability to start this process without their parents knowing. The child can go from ‌the​ classroom down to the onsite school​ health ‌center without telling their ⁤parents. Staff can’t ⁢tell the parents, and ⁣if they did, ⁣they ⁢would be in‍ violation of the law.”

The⁣ Reproductive &‌ Gender-Affirming Health Care bill allows minors to‌ undergo medical ​procedures, including abortion and gender-affirming ​care, without parental notification or approval. Similarly, the School-Based Health Centers bill permits students to receive ‌medical treatment at ⁢school clinics without parental consent or knowledge.

The Referendum Project emphasizes that their stance is not about ​taking a position on ‍abortion or transgender ‍issues. Instead,⁣ they firmly believe that⁣ parents ⁤should have the right to‍ be involved in their child’s well-being, ⁣rather than leaving important decisions solely in the hands of the school system.

Another law being challenged ‍is the Reproductive‍ Health Provider Protections, which shields providers of reproductive and transgender procedures​ from⁣ civil, criminal, and medical malpractice actions. This law also imposes a $10,000 fine on those who discuss alternative treatments, such as promoting adoption instead of abortion.

To​ raise awareness and gather support, Better Together New Mexico launched​ the “Not My Kid” video⁤ campaign ‌as part of their public engagement efforts.

State Resistance

The Referendum Project initially ⁣aimed to collect approximately 180,000 signatures, equivalent to 25 percent of‍ the eligible electorate, within 90 days after the 2023 legislative session concluded. This would ⁢have prevented the laws ⁣from taking effect and allowed voters to decide ⁢their fate in the 2024 ballot.

However, they faced challenges in meeting this ‍goal. ​”First, ⁢it’s challenging, and secondly, ⁣you’ve got to get the form⁣ approved by the Secretary of State,” explained Carla Sonntag.

Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, a​ Democrat, rejected some of the petitions over minor technicalities. “Once she would kick it back, then we would have to start the process over, fix it, resubmit ‌it, and she would‌ take 30​ days, right up to ​the 90​ days ‍after the session ends,” Sonntag‍ added.

Although the Referendum Project fell short of their initial‌ target, they​ are now striving to gather signatures from 10 percent of eligible voters for⁤ each law by June of next ⁢year. This would allow ‌citizens to vote on‌ whether the⁤ laws should ⁤remain in effect.

However,​ Secretary ‌of State Oliver has classified‍ all six laws as exempt from the referendum process, citing the clause in the constitution ⁢that⁣ exempts laws related​ to public peace, health, or safety. This has resulted in legal battles between the Referendum Project and the state government.

Despite the‍ challenges, Larry Marker, who​ is also a pro se attorney⁣ defending the case in court, remains determined. He anticipates that the New Mexico ‍Supreme‌ Court will side with ⁣the Secretary of State, ‍after which he plans to take the⁢ case ⁣to the federal district court. ‍Marker ​argues that the state is violating its own constitution and governing its people in a manner inconsistent with its agreement with the United States.

New Mexico’s Progressive Leadership

Larry Marker has witnessed similar strategies‍ employed by the state of New Mexico in the past. He believes⁤ that the state has become increasingly corrupt and radically progressive, evident in its treatment of the oil and⁢ gas industry and the passage of controversial‌ bills.

He pointed out Governor ‍Michelle Lujan Grisham’s recent emergency​ order, which temporarily suspended citizens’ right to carry firearms in public​ in response to several shooting deaths. When questioned about upholding the U.S. Constitution, Governor Grisham stated that no constitutional right, including her oath, is absolute.

Carla Sonntag emphasized ⁤that the issue ‌lies not with guns but⁢ with failed leadership. She criticized the governor’s response to gun violence, which focused on‌ eliminating qualified immunity for law enforcement officers and reforming ‍the ‍bail system. According to Sonntag, without qualified immunity, officers can be sued even if⁢ they followed protocol, and the bail ‍reform system has resulted in criminals being released before their paperwork ⁣is complete.

Ms. Sonntag also highlighted ⁢a memo issued by Albuquerque Police Chief‌ Harold Medina, which directed ⁢police to manage homelessness without arresting people or enforcing laws related to quality of life. She believes that⁤ this hands-off policy for transients has contributed to‍ the crime problem in​ the city.

Ms. Sonntag​ pointed⁤ to a⁢ memo (pdf) Albuquerque Police Chief Harold Medina issued in April⁣ 2022 that directs police to “manage homelessness without arresting​ people ‍or punishing them for sleeping outside.”

According to Mr. Marker, the focus should be on protecting hardworking citizens ​who simply want ‍to be left alone. ‍He emphasized that the⁣ federal and state constitutions support​ this pursuit of⁢ personal freedom. “All I want, personally, is to be left the hell​ alone, and come to find‌ out, that’s the American‍ dream, right?” he said.

Despite facing resistance from the government, ⁣the Referendum⁢ Project remains committed to‌ raising awareness‍ and educating the ⁢public⁤ about the impact of ‌these laws. They believe that citizens have the right to know what is happening⁣ and are determined to push ‍forward.

Victoria Derrer, a point of contact ⁤for the ‍Referendum Project,⁤ expressed her personal ‍conviction to take action. “As ⁤I learned more​ about​ these laws, I just⁢ knew that it was past time for me personally‌ to put feet‌ to my convictions,” she said. The movement has gained momentum through the support of like-minded individuals across the ‌state.

In response to The Epoch ‌Times’ request for comment, ⁢a⁢ spokesperson ‌for the Secretary of State’s office defended‌ their position, stating that ⁤two courts in New Mexico have⁤ already sided with the office, ⁤affirming the Secretary ⁤of State’s authority to reject the referendum petitions targeting exempted laws.

What ‌is the goal of the movement in organizing rallies, town hall meetings, and⁢ media campaigns

Making solely in the ⁤hands‌ of ‌the state or school officials.

Moreover, the movement also challenges the integrity of the ​election process through the opposition to SB 4: “Automatic Voter​ Registration” and SB 10: “Indicted Parties as Candidates.” These laws are perceived by the movement as threatening the integrity and fairness of the electoral system.

SB 4 ‍introduces automatic voter registration,⁢ potentially allowing ineligible or non-citizen individuals to be ​registered to vote without proper verification. The movement⁢ argues ⁢that​ this could lead to voter fraud and undermine the credibility of elections.

Furthermore, SB 10 allows individuals who have been indicted for a crime to run⁤ for public office. The⁢ movement ​questions​ the ethics ​and trustworthiness of candidates​ with criminal⁢ charges and⁤ suggests that‌ this law could ​potentially harm the​ trust between elected officials and ⁤the public.

The Referendum Project ⁤asserts that their fight is not ‍against ‍the state legislature itself, but rather against these specific laws that⁢ they believe ⁢infringe upon parental ‌rights and compromise the election process. They have initiated a petition drive​ to collect signatures in⁤ order to⁣ place these laws on the ballot for a state-wide referendum.

The movement has gained significant traction, with various organizations and individuals showing​ support. Grassroots activists, ⁣concerned parents,⁣ and community leaders have joined forces to challenge these laws and send a message to the state ⁤government.

In response to the movement, proponents‍ of the challenged‌ laws argue that they are necessary for progress and⁣ equality. They contend that reproductive and gender-affirming healthcare should⁤ be accessible to minors without parental interference,‌ and automatic voter registration⁤ is a step towards increased democratic participation.

To⁣ bring ​attention to their‍ cause, the movement has organized rallies, town hall meetings, ⁤and media campaigns to inform the public about the potential consequences of these laws. Their goal ⁢is to raise awareness, gather support, and ultimately overturn these laws through the democratic process.

The grassroots ‍movement challenging the threatening⁤ laws⁣ in ​New Mexico​ highlights the ‌power of‌ citizen activism and the importance of safeguarding ⁤individual rights.‍ By exercising their constitutional right to challenge and nullify laws, these dedicated individuals are striving to protect their ‌communities and uphold the values they hold ‍dear.

As the movement gains momentum, it remains to be seen whether the state government will ​address these concerns ⁤and‍ listen to the voices of its citizens. In the‌ battle between grassroots activism ⁣and legislative decisions, the outcome will likely shape the future ⁣of New Mexico and influence similar⁤ movements⁢ across the nation.

In the end, the fight against these laws represents the enduring ‌spirit ⁣of ‍democracy, where the‍ power ultimately lies with the people.