New Mexico
Latest SCOTUS abortion case uncertain and could impact New Mexico – NM Political Report
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday on an abortion-related case, this time over whether an Idaho anti-abortion law preempts a federal law that requires hospitals to stabilize a patient in a medical emergency if that involves abortion. Idaho’s abortion ban only allows abortion in the event the patient is facing death. There […]
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday on an abortion-related case, this time over whether an Idaho anti-abortion law preempts a federal law that requires hospitals to stabilize a patient in a medical emergency if that involves abortion.
Idaho’s abortion ban only allows abortion in the event the patient is facing death. There is no exception to save the health of the pregnant person. In the few months since this law has been in effect in Idaho, one Idaho hospital system reported having to airlift pregnant patients to out-of-state hospitals for care about once every other week, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar told the Supreme Court during oral argument.
The case, Idaho v. United States, is the second time the U.S. Supreme Court has heard oral arguments in a case involving abortion this term. The previous case was over the availability of mifepristone, the first of a two-step abortion regimen. Justices are expected to rule on both cases in late June or early July.
The Idaho case has repercussions for states such as New Mexico in various ways. One is that if a majority of Supreme Court justices side with Idaho, it will increase more abortion patient referrals to states where abortion is still legal and safe, such as New Mexico. This comes at the same time that Arizona’s 1864 abortion ban is set to go into effect on June 8, though the Arizona House narrowly passed a repeal of that law on Wednesday, which would still leave a 15-week abortion ban in place.
How the AZ Supreme Court decision on abortion impacts New Mexico
Advocates argue that another repercussion is that if the Supreme Court sides with Idaho, it could open the door to allowing any state to ban any type of emergency room care, such as providing stabilizing care in emergency rooms for patients with HIV/AIDS.
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act was enacted in 1986, under the Reagan administration, to prevent “patient dumping” on other hospitals. It requires that all hospitals that receive Medicare funding must stabilize a patient, regardless of ability to pay or insurance status, if the patient is suffering a medical emergency. Idaho and six other states have anti-abortion laws so severe, they conflict with that federal law.
Another concern for New Mexico is that the state of Texas sued the U.S. government over EMTALA in 2022. That case was not a part of the Supreme Court’s oral argument on Wednesday but it leads to the question of whether Texas could refuse emergency room care to stabilize a patient if that care means providing an abortion if the Supreme Court rules in favor of Idaho.
In a national press conference, Meghan Daniel, who heads a Chicago-based abortion fund provider, said during the call with reporters that if emergency care is no longer available, the cost of lifelighting pregnant patients to another state would cost tens of thousands of dollars, in addition to the other medical bills.
“The roll back of EMTALA could push our support to the breaking point for life flights alone – $12,000 to $25,000 per flight to risk health and life would undue abortion funds,” Daniel said.
Joan Lamunyon Sanford, executive director of the New Mexico-based abortion fund provider Faith Roots Reproductive Action, said another concern could be for individuals who live in New Mexico but who live so close to the state line that the nearest hospital could be in Lubbock or Odessa or Midlands. In addition, much of southern New Mexico is served by El Paso’s higher critical care hospitals.
“I think that’s a very accurate analysis,” Lamunyon Sanford said of Daniel’s statement. She said that in the event that Texas upends EMTALA in Texas, pregnant individuals who live in New Mexico could travel to a Texas-based hospital for a medical emergency only to find themselves airlifted back into New Mexico for emergency abortion care.
“These kinds of bans of any kind of care put a strain on medical infrastructure,” Lamunyon Sanford said.
Lamunyon Sanford said FRRA has not yet considered the implications for their abortion fund, which supports individuals traveling to New Mexico from out-of-state for an abortion but she expressed frustration over the situation.
“It’s just so profoundly disappointing that women’s lives and people with the capacity for pregnancy would be so expendable. By people who claim to uphold family values,” she said.
The female justices, including Justice Amy Coney Barrett, asked hard questions to the Idaho lawyer representing that state. But even if Coney Barrett sides with the more liberal wing of the court, the liberal faction will need at least one more vote and which direction Chief Justice John Roberts or Justice Brett Kavanaugh were leaning was not immediately clear during oral arguments. Justice Samuel Alito worried many because he questioned the fact that the phrase “unborn child” appears in EMTALA. This has raised concerns that he was signaling interest in the notion of “fetal personhood.” Unlike the mifepristone case the Supreme Court heard last month, the oral argument for this case ended without a likely outcome.
U.S. Supreme Court hears case to restrict access to medication abortion
Katie O’Connor, director of federal abortion policy for National Women’s Law Center, said during the national press call that the worry that around Alito’s invoking the term “fetal personhood” “gets to the issue at the heart of this case.” Alito asked questions to invoke debate about there being “two people” whose lives are at stake in medical emergencies that involve a pregnant person.
“To single out pregnant people and pregnant people alone as the only group not entitled to receive emergency medical treatment…puts on display with Alito’s distorted phrase “the unborn child” in statute to mean something it clearly does not…gets to the heart of this case and what Idaho is trying to do,” O’Connor said.
New Mexico
14 indicted in alleged Permian Basin crude‑oil theft scheme spanning New Mexico and Texas, prosecutors say
A federal grand jury in Lubbock has indicted 14 people accused of stealing crude oil in eastern New Mexico and hauling it into Texas to resell at cut‑rate prices.
Prosecutors say the scheme targeted the Permian Basin’s vast production network, the oil‑rich region spanning southeastern New Mexico and West Texas that covers more than 86,000 square miles and accounts for the majority of U.S. crude oil production.
All 14 defendants are charged with conspiracy to transport stolen property across state lines, and several also face counts of interstate transportation and receipt, possession, or sale of stolen property, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Texas.
Indictment outlines alleged operation
Returned April 8, the indictment alleges the group stole crude oil in eastern New Mexico, some stored on U.S. government-leased land, and resold it to co‑conspirators at prices below the standard U.S. market benchmark.
Prosecutors say the conspirators transported the stolen oil into Texas for resale at a profit, knowing it was stolen.
Texas, New Mexico defendants identified by prosecutors
Texas defendants are James Darrell Reid, 65, and Randell Wayne Reid, 41, owners of Texas-based Reidco Enterprises and both of Electra – about 25 miles northwest of Wichita Falls and 115 miles from Fort Worth – along with Christopher Frederick Harris, 22, of Seminole, about 80 miles west of Midland.
The remaining 11 defendants are from Lovington, a southeastern New Mexico community of about 11,690 people, roughly 20 miles west of the Texas state line and squarely inside the Permian Basin.
They include:
- Louis George Edgett, 68;
- Brenden Floyd Strickland, 25;
- Sixto Herrera-Estebane, 43;
- Gyardo Gonzalez, 47;
- Jesus Martin Hernandez-Borja, 51;
- Diana Marquez Rojo, 45;
- Jose Luis Rojo, 49;
- Jose Mario Rivas-Mendoza, 37;
- Miguel A. Soto, 41;
- Tavares Montrail Cole, 48; and
- Danny Dale Brown Jr., 42.
Potential penalties outlined by DOJ
According to prosecutors, the defendants face up to five years in prison for conspiracy and up to 10 years per count for interstate transportation, possession, or sale of stolen property.
The investigation was conducted by the Bureau of Land Management, the FBI, the Texas Department of Public Safety’s Criminal Investigation Division, and sheriff’s offices in Lea and Eddy counties in New Mexico.
CBS News Texas will provide updates as additional information becomes available.
New Mexico
Governor establishes Energy Affordability and Grid Reliability Council – 13-member council designed to protect ratepayers, modernize the grid – Office of the Governor – Michelle Lujan Grisham
SANTA FE — Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham today signed an executive order establishing the New Mexico Energy Affordability and Grid Reliability Council to address the rising cost of electricity in a rapidly changing energy landscape.
The Council will convene state agency leaders, utility executives and experts in rural cooperative utilities, tribal energy, consumer advocacy, and energy policy and infrastructure to develop strategies for keeping energy affordable while ensuring the grid can meet the demands of a growing, modernizing New Mexico economy.
“At a time of dramatically rising energy prices, it’s imperative that we do everything we can to protect New Mexico ratepayers while ensuring abundant clean energy supply,” said Governor Lujan Grisham. “The experts I’ve appointed to the New Mexico Energy Affordability and Grid Reliability Council are well-positioned to make smart, insightful recommendations and I look forward to their findings.”
The Council will evaluate and recommend strategies across four interconnected areas:
- Ratepayer protection: Ensuring that large-load growth — including data centers and onshore manufacturing — does not disproportionately increase costs for residential, rural, tribal and small business customers.
- Grid modernization and reliability: Recommending rate designs and financing strategies that enable prudent infrastructure investment while minimizing long-term rate escalation.
- Clean energy progress: Advancing New Mexico’s net-zero goals under the Energy Transition Act by expanding zero-carbon generation and storage while maintaining affordable access.
- Permitting efficiency: Identifying opportunities to streamline and coordinate state and local permitting for electricity infrastructure — accelerating deployment of clean energy projects without compromising environmental review, tribal consultation, or regulatory safeguards.
The Council will deliver a final report — including legislative, regulatory and administrative recommendations — to the Governor and the Legislature by November 1, 2026.
The Council consists of 13 members representing state government, utilities, rural cooperatives, tribal communities and independent experts:
- Erin Taylor, acting secretary, Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department
- Rob Black, secretary, Economic Development Department
- Cholla Khoury, chief of staff, Public Regulation Commission
- Lynn Mostoller, executive director, Renewable Energy Transmission Authority
- Sunalei Stewart, deputy commissioner for operations, State Land Office
- Don Tarry, president and CEO, TXNM Energy (PNM)
- Kelly A. Tomblin, president and CEO, El Paso Electric
- Zoe Lees, regional vice president, regulatory policy, Xcel Energy
- Vince Martinez, CEO, New Mexico Rural Electric Cooperative Association
- Javier Bucobo, vice president of markets and regulatory affairs, Avangrid (grid infrastructure expert)
- Joseph Yar, attorney, Velarde & Yar (consumer/ratepayer advocate)
- Sandra Begay Keeto, retired, Sandia National Laboratories; member, Navajo Nation (tribal energy expert)
- Rep. Meredith Dixon, New Mexico House of Representatives, District 20 (energy policy expert)
The Council is administratively attached to the Department of Finance and Administration. Members will serve without compensation, other than per diem and mileage as permitted by law.
The executive order can be viewed here.
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. – Republican candidate for governor Duke Rodriguez is suing Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham over her executive order that started universal free child care before a new law takes effect.
The governor enacted the program through executive order in November.
Lawmakers passed a universal child care law during the past session, but that law does not take effect until May 20.
Rodriguez says he objects to some of the rules and to how the governor started the program. The suit asks the Second Judicial District Court to prohibit further enforcement of any regulations tied to the program.
“You could understand an outgoing governor trying to do it for political capital, for expediency just to say, I’m first in the nation.” Rodriguez said.
Rodriguez says he is confident he will win and that the rules he is challenging will be struck down.
“We also now have what we call pre emptive eligibility, which means you don’t even have to prove you’re eligible and you’re covered the moment you walk in,” Rodriguez said. “All of those things individually and collectively that have been proposed and changed probably invite fraud, waste and abuse and you know it.”
The governor’s office responds
The governor’s office sent a statement saying the program was properly implemented and that the governor is confident the lawsuit will be rejected.
A spokesperson for the governor sent KOB 4 the following statement:
“This lawsuit makes clear that Mr. Rodriguez has a fundamental misunderstanding how state government works. He states that ECECD did not have the authority to undergo rulemaking regarding universal childcare. They do. He states that ECECD did not have the funding to implement the program when they did their rulemaking. They did. That is why the program was operational in December – before the 2026 Legislative session started. Perhaps more importantly, the lawsuit ignores that the legislature passed SB 241, which codified the program and its future funding into law. The governor is confident that the courts will reject his meritless claims.“
-
New York3 seconds agoMamdani Considers Delaying Pension-Fund Payments to Ease Budget Gap
-
Detroit, MI30 minutes agoThings to do in Metro Detroit, April 24 and beyond
-
San Francisco, CA42 minutes agoCA to open 3 new state parks and expand others, including in Bay Area: Here’s where
-
Dallas, TX48 minutes agoWild vs. Stars Game 3: Key takeaways as Dallas takes series lead on Wyatt Johnston’s 2OT winner
-
Miami, FL54 minutes agoMiami-Dade deputies detain elderly father who they say shot and killed his son after a domestic dispute
-
Boston, MA1 hour agoBoston has one of the best public markets in the country, says USA TODAY
-
Denver, CO1 hour agoRed flag fatigue? Colorado sees near-record number of critical fire days
-
Seattle, WA1 hour agoFOLLOWUP: West Seattle pickleball players band together to save court access