ReportWire

Tag: New Mexico state government

  • New Mexico revokes license of local marijuana retailer for selling cannabis from California

    New Mexico revokes license of local marijuana retailer for selling cannabis from California

    [ad_1]

    SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — New Mexico has revoked the license of a marijuana retailer in Albuquerque for selling out-of-state cannabis in violation of state law, the state cannabis control division announced Thursday.

    Regulators allege that the Paradise Exotics Distro cannabis store on a central shopping thoroughfare sold cannabis products imported from California and marked with a California stamp of origin. Representatives for the business could not immediately be reached by phone or social media.

    New Mexico is among at least 21 states that have legalized recreational marijuana for adults, while a federal marijuana ban still precludes interstate cannabis trade or trafficking.

    Some legal cannabis growers in Washington state who were ordered to halt operations in April over concerns about pesticide contamination are getting back to business.

    A top North Carolina legislator says a bill that would legalize marijuana use for medicinal purposes is probably dead for the rest of this year’s General Assembly session.

    Officials and residents of several New Jersey shore towns say the state’s law decriminalizing marijuana use is having an unintended effect: emboldening large groups of teenagers to run amok on beaches and boardwalks, knowing there is little chance of them getting in trouble for it.

    Maryland is becoming the latest state to legally sell recreational marijuana. About 100 stores that already have been licensed to sell cannabis for medicinal purposes will be able to begin selling it recreationally Saturday.

    Amid a persistent glut of cannabis on the West Coast, the states of Oregon, California and Washington have adopted so-called trigger bills that would authorize interstate cannabis trade agreements should the U.S. government someday allow it.

    New Mexico prohibits the local sale of out-of-state cannabis products, with a variety of concerns among state lawmakers ranging from product safety to local economic development. Thursday marked the first time that regulators in New Mexico have revoked a cannabis business license since the start of legal recreational marijuana sales on April 1, 2022.

    Regulators say Paradise Exotics Distro also failed to properly document shipping manifests and inaccurately reported sales data to a state system that tracks marijuana production from seedlings to sales.

    “This revocation should serve as a warning to those selling or receiving out-of-state cannabis products,” said Regulation and Licensing Department Superintendent Linda Trujillo in a statement. “Our compliance officers are ramping up inspections and we will work to remove bad actors from within the New Mexico cannabis industry.”

    Duke Rodriguez, CEO of Ultra Health, the largest cannabis operator in New Mexico, said the license suspension suggests an imbalance in New Mexico’s cannabis market. He urged the state to ease restrictions on large-scale cannabis cultivation.

    “People should ask, ‘Why is there an apparent need for product to cross state lines?’” Rodriguez said. “Usually it is because the illicit black market fills a void when the exiting state market is unable to fill the demand.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Special prosecutors appointed in Baldwin set shooting case

    Special prosecutors appointed in Baldwin set shooting case

    [ad_1]

    SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — Santa Fe’s district attorney has appointed two veteran New Mexico lawyers to serve as the new special prosecutors in the manslaughter case against Alec Baldwin and a weapons supervisor in the fatal shooting of a cinematographer during a 2021 movie rehearsal.

    The appointment of Kari Morrissey and Jason Lewis to the positions will allow District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies to focus on New Mexico’s “broader public safety needs,” her spokesperson Heather Brewer said in a statement Wednesday.

    The original special prosecutor, Andrea Reeb, resigned earlier in the wake of missteps in the filing of initial charges against Baldwin and objections that Reeb’s role as a state legislator created conflicting responsibilities.

    Carmack-Altwies subsequently had been preparing to appoint a new special prosecutor and also guide the complex case as co-counsel.

    But Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer said on Monday the district attorney should either lead the case on her own or turn it over entirely to another prosecutor.

    Baldwin and movie armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed have pleaded not guilty to charges of involuntary manslaughter in the shooting death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins. The charges carry a maximum penalty of 18 months in prison and fines.

    Hutchins died shortly after being wounded Oct. 21, 2021, during rehearsals for the Western film “Rust” at a ranch on the outskirts of Santa Fe. Baldwin was pointing a pistol at Hutchins when the gun went off, killing her and wounding the director, Joel Souza.

    A defense attorney for Gutierrez-Reed objected to Carmack-Altwies’ earlier plans to serve as co-counsel, arguing it would be illegal under New Mexico law and fundamentally unfair to a 25-year-old defendant with limited financial resources.

    Brewer said the appointment of Morrisey and Lewis, with their “extensive experience and trial expertise, will allow the state to pursue justice for Halyna Hutchins and ensure that in New Mexico everyone is held accountable under the law.”

    A weekslong preliminary hearing in May will decide whether evidence against Baldwin and Gutierrez-Reed is sufficient to proceed to trial.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Abortion clinics crossing state borders not always welcome

    Abortion clinics crossing state borders not always welcome

    [ad_1]

    BRISTOL, Va. (AP) — The pastors smiled as they held the doors open, grabbing the hands of those who walked by and urging many to keep praying and to keep showing up. Some responded with a hug. A few grimaced as they squeezed past.

    Shelley Koch, a longtime resident of southwest Virginia, had witnessed a similar scene many Sunday mornings after church services. On this day, however, it played out in a parking lot outside a modest government building in Bristol where officials had just advanced a proposal that threatens to tear apart the very fabric of her community.

    For months, residents of the town have battled over whether clinics limited by strict anti-abortion laws in neighboring Tennessee, Kentucky and West Virginia should be allowed to continue to hop over the border and operate there. The proposal on the table, submitted by anti-abortion activists, was that they shouldn’t. The local pastors were on hand to spread that message.

    “We’re trying to figure out what we do at this point,” said Koch, who supports abortion rights. “We’re just on our heels all the time.”

    The conflict is not unique to this border community, which boasts a spot where a person can stand in Virginia and Tennessee at the same time. Similar disputes have broken out across the country following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the landmark 1973 decision establishing a constitutional right to abortion.

    As clinics have been forced to shutter in Republican-dominant states with strict abortion bans, some have relocated to cities and towns just over the border, in states with more liberal laws. The goal is to help women avoid traveling long distances. Yet that effort does not always go smoothly: The politics of border towns and cities don’t always align with those in their state capitals. They can be more socially conservative, with residents who object to abortion on moral grounds.

    Anti-abortion activists have tapped into that sentiment — in Virginia and elsewhere — and are proposing changes to zoning and other local ordinance laws to stop the clinics from moving in. Since Roe was overturned, such local ordinances have been identified as a tool for officials to control where patients can get an abortion, advocates and legal experts say.

    In Texas, even before Roe was overturned, more than 40 towns prohibited abortion services inside their city limits. That trend, led by anti-abortion activist Mark Lee Dickson, has since successfully spread to politically conservative towns in Iowa, Louisiana, New Mexico, Nebraska and Ohio.

    Under Roe, the high court had ruled that it was unconstitutional for state or local lawmakers to create any “substantial obstacle” to a patient seeking an abortion. That rule no longer exists.

    While such local ordinance changes are no longer necessary in Texas, which now has one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country, Dickson says he and others will continue to pursue them in other states with liberal abortion statutes.

    “We’re going to keep on going forward and do everything that we can to protect life,” he said.

    In New Mexico, which has one of the country’s most liberal abortion access laws, activists in two counties and three cities in the eastern part of the state have successfully sought ordinance changes restricting the procedure. Democratic officials have since proposed legislation to ban them from interfering with abortion access.

    In the college town of Carbondale, Illinois, a state where abortion remains widely accessible, anti-abortion activists have asked zoning officials to block future clinics from opening after two already operate in town. Thus far, they’ve been unsuccessful.

    Meanwhile, some of the states that have severely restricted abortion access are trying to make it harder for residents to end their pregnancies elsewhere. Employees at the University of Idaho who refer students to a clinic just 8 miles (13 kilometers) away in the liberal-leaning state of Washington could face felony charges under a recently passed state law.

    Perhaps no other place so neatly encapsulates the issue as the twin cities of Bristol, Virginia, and Bristol, Tennessee. Before Roe, an abortion clinic had operated for decades in Bristol, Tennessee. After Roe, which triggered the Volunteer State’s strict abortion law, the clinic hopped over the state line into Bristol, Virginia.

    That’s when anti-abortion advocates began pushing back. At the request of some concerned citizens, the socially conservative, faith-based Family Foundation of Virginia helped draft an amendment to the city’s zoning code that says, apart from where the existing clinic sits, land can’t be used to end a “pre-born human life.”

    “Nobody wants their town to be known as the place where people come to take human life. That’s just not a reputation that the people in Bristol want for their area,” said foundation President Victoria Cobb.

    The amendment has stalled before the Planning Commission as the city’s attorney, the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia and others question its legality. Meanwhile, the board of supervisors in Washington County, which surrounds Bristol, passed a similar restrictive zoning ordinance on Feb. 14, and at least three counties have since adopted resolutions declaring their “pro-life stance,” according to the Family Foundation.

    Before Roe was overturned, such zoning restrictions would have been unconstitutional, noted ACLU attorney Geri Greenspan. Now, however, “we’re sort of in uncharted legal territory,” she said.

    It’s a struggle that residents like Koch weren’t expecting.

    In 2020 — when Democrats were in full control of state government — they rolled back restrictions on abortion services, envisioning the state as a safe haven for access. Virginia now has one of the South’s most permissive abortion laws, which comforted Koch when Roe was overturned.

    Now, however, her relief has been replaced by anxiety.

    “I realized how little I knew about the workings of local government,” she said. “It’s been a detriment.”

    The Bristol Women’s Health clinic is battling multiple lawsuits but would not be affected by the proposed ordinance unless it tried to expand or make other changes. While some residents oppose the facility, “they’re more afraid that this industry is going to expand and that Bristol is going to just become a multistate hub of the abortion industry,” said the Rev. Chris Hess, who as pastor of St. Anne Catholic Church has advocated for the zoning change.

    Debra Mehaffey, who has spent more than a decade protesting outside abortion clinics, said people are coming to Bristol from Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Georgia, “all over to come get abortions, you know, because they can’t get them in their state.”

    “So it will be great to see it totally abolished,” she said.

    Clinic owner Diane Derzis, who has owned numerous other abortion clinics — including the one in Mississippi at the center of the Supreme Court’s recent decision — downplays the pushback. She said she’s grown accustomed to protests and even experienced the bombing of a separate clinic.

    But Derzis is also girding herself for many more post-Roe battles in the future.

    Abortion “is just under attack and it’s going to be for years,” she said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Some Democratic-led states seek to bolster voter protections

    Some Democratic-led states seek to bolster voter protections

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Lawmakers in several Democratic-controlled states are advocating sweeping voter protections this year, reacting to what they view as a broad undermining of voting rights by the Supreme Court and Republican-led states as well as a failed effort in Congress to bolster access to the polls.

    Legislators in Connecticut, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey and New Mexico have introduced voting rights measures, while Michigan’s secretary of state is preparing a plan.

    Among other things, the proposals would require state approval for local governments to change redistricting or voting procedures, ban voter suppression and intimidation, mandate that ballots are printed in more languages, increase protections for voters with disabilities, ensure the right to vote for those with previous felony convictions and instruct judges to prioritize voter access when hearing election-related challenges.

    The measures are taking a much wider approach than legislation targeting a single aspect of voting or elections law. They seek to implement on a statewide basis many of the protections under the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, a law that many Democrats and voting rights groups say is being stripped of its most important elements.

    If the legislation is enacted, the states would join California, New York, Oregon, Washington and Virginia in having comprehensive voting rights laws.

    “It’s up to states now to ensure that the right to vote is protected,” said Janai Nelson, president of the the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.

    Maryland’s proposal includes a requirement for local voting changes to receive preapproval, mirroring core provisions of the federal law that was struck down by the Supreme Court a decade ago.

    Maryland was not among the states, mostly in the South, that was covered under the provision known as preclearance before the court ended it. But lawmakers there saw it as important because of persistent concerns over how districts for local governing bodies have been drawn, said Morgan Drayton, policy and engagement manager at Common Cause Maryland.

    “A lot of our maps here are drawn behind closed doors, and there’s not a lot of input from the public that’s able to be given,” she said. “So this would do a lot to make these processes more transparent.”

    In Maryland’s Baltimore County, a lawsuit claimed the county council’s map packed most Black voters into a single district. The state legislation would require jurisdictions in Maryland with a history of voter discrimination to have redistricting and election changes cleared by the state attorney general.

    Democratic state Del. Stephanie Smith, a co-sponsor of the legislation, said that despite Maryland’s racial diversity and history of diversity in its political leadership, “access to the ballot and equitable representation is uneven.”

    “This bill strengthens our commitment to voting access and protections at a time of great stress on our democratic institutions,” she said.

    Proposals in Michigan and New Mexico address harassment against election workers and voters, especially those in minority communities. One of several bills in New Mexico would protect election officials, from the secretary of state to county and municipal elections clerks, from intimidation. That would be defined as inducing or attempting to induce fear, and a violation would be punishable as a fourth-degree felony punishable by up to 18 months in prison.

    Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, said she will seek similar protections for voters, including prohibiting firearms within a certain distance of polling places.

    “We need an explicit ban on voter suppression and intimidation,” she said.

    Connecticut’s legislation would expand language assistance for voters who speak, read or understand languages other than English. Language assistance is covered under the federal law, but only specifies protections for Spanish-speakers and for Asian, Native American and Alaska Native language minorities.

    Ballots offered in Arabic, Haitian Creole and other languages also are needed, said Steven Lance, policy counsel at the national NAACP Legal Defense Fund.

    A language would be covered if the group speaking it is more than 2% of the citizens of voting age in a particular municipality or the group includes more than 4,000 citizens of voting age, under Connecticut’s legislative proposal.

    Residents also would have the right to ask the secretary of state to review whether a certain language should be covered, Lance said.

    In New Jersey, advocacy organizations are pushing to expand voting rights legislation to include more groups that would be specifically protected from discrimination, including the state’s sizable Arab American population.

    “A reality is the federal VRA was originally crafted in 1965, and while there have been other bills in the decade since, the VRA doesn’t reflect the diversity of the population of New Jersey in 2023,” said Henal Patel, law & policy director at the New Jersey Institute for Social Justice.

    Some state voting rights bills also seek to create databases for information that has not always been readily available, such as polling place locations, voting rules and redistricting maps. The bills also would specify that state judges interpret voting laws in a way that ensures people maintain their right to vote.

    Democrats in Minnesota are pushing numerous voting changes, including restoring voting rights to felons as soon as they are released from prison, allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to preregister so they are ready to vote as soon as they turn 18 and automatically registering people to vote when they obtain or renew their driver’s licenses.

    Passing state voting rights legislation is only half the battle, said state Sen. Jennifer McClellan, a Virginia Democrat who introduced a state voting rights act that passed in 2021 when Democrats controlled both houses of the Legislature and the governor’s office.

    McClellan noted that ensuring voting rights historically was a bipartisan issue, but said Republicans are now focused on “fighting phantom voter fraud” — making this year’s Virginia legislative elections all the more important.

    “The entire General Assembly is up for election this year, and I think that’s going to be a big theme in the election — that if we want to protect our progress on voting rights, we’re going to need to make sure that Democrats keep the Senate and regain the majority in the House,” McClellan said.

    McClellan won a special election this past week to fill an open seat in the U.S. House, where she will make history as the first Black woman to represent the state in Congress.

    ___

    Associated Press coverage of race and voting receives support from the Jonathan Logan Family Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Governor voids territorial orders targeting Native Americans

    Governor voids territorial orders targeting Native Americans

    [ad_1]

    ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — New Mexico’s governor on Monday voided four pre-statehood proclamations that targeted Native Americans during what was a tumultuous time across the western frontier as federal soldiers tried to defeat Navajos, Apaches and others.

    Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham described the 19th century proclamations by former territorial governors as offensive, saying rescinding the proclamations would help to heal old wounds and strengthen bonds with Native American communities.

    “The government of New Mexico has not always respected the importance and sovereignty of our Native American citizens, and our history is sadly stained with cruel mistreatment of Native Americans,” Lujan Grisham wrote in an executive order issued on Indigenous Peoples Day.

    Lujan Grisham, a Democrat who is running for reelection, pointed to counties within the territory that once offered bounties for scalps of Apache men and women.

    Marches, protests and celebrations were held around the U.S. to mark Indigenous Peoples Day. In New Mexico’s capital of Santa Fe, people walked with banners aimed at raising awareness about missing and slain Native Americans. Demonstrators left paint splattered on a monument of Kit Carson, who had a role in the death of hundreds of Native Americans during the colonization of the West.

    A celebration in Flagstaff, Arizona, focused on youth who talked about how Indigenous people have contributed to the community. A group of Hopi children performed a Corn Dance in front of City Hall.

    In New Mexico, the unwinding of the past proclamations was spurred by Colorado Gov. Jared Polis’ move in 2021 to rescind an 1864 order by one of that state’s territorial governors that eventually led to the Sand Creek Massacre, when U.S. troops killed more than 200 Native Americans in one of Colorado’s darkest and most fraught historic moments.

    A search for similar documents led Valerie Rangel, the city of Santa Fe’s appointed historian, to a book of newspaper clippings in the archives of the Huntington Library in California. It represented the most complete collection of New Mexico’s territorial proclamations.

    Two of the proclamations voided by Lujan Grisham were issued in 1851 by James S. Calhoun, New Mexico’s first territorial governor. They directed Native Americans to be excluded from official census counts and authorized militias to “pursue and attack any hostile tribe” that was said to be entering settlements for the purpose of plundering.

    Proclamations issued nearly two decades later by Governors Robert B. Mitchell and William A. Pile declared certain tribes as outlaws and authorized New Mexico residents to commit violence against them.

    “I started looking at the history surrounding the proclamations — was there an impact, did it really fuel hate?” said Rangel, whose roots include Apache and Navajo.

    Through her research, she found several bounties for scalping, with some counties going so far as to pay for newspaper advertisements in states beyond New Mexico to solicit people for the efforts. New Mexico became a U.S. state in January 1912.

    Rangel shared her findings with tribal and state officials. She’s among those pushing for this part of New Mexico’s history to be included in school curriculums.

    “I’d like to see more communication with tribes and have them be the source of the history that’s being learned,” she said.

    New Mexico is home to nearly two dozen tribal nations and pueblos, with Native Americans making up more than 12% of the population.

    [ad_2]

    Source link