The U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in June 2022 ended federal abortion rights. (Photo by Sofia Resnick / States Newsroom)
The New Mexico state Supreme Court unanimously ruled Thursday that several local ordinances restricting abortion rights violate state law, and struck down ones adopted by Lea and Roosevelt counties, along with the cities of Hobbs and Clovis.
“Our Legislature granted to counties and municipalities all powers and duties not inconsistent with the laws of New Mexico. The Ordinances violate this core precept and invade the Legislature’s authority to regulate access to and provision of reproductive healthcare,” the court wrote in its opinion by Justice C. Shannon Bacon. “Therefore, based on the independent and adequate state law grounds provided in the Reproductive and Gender-Affirming Health Care Freedom Act, the Medical Practice Act, the Medical Malpractice Act, and the Health Care Code, as well as the Uniform Licensing Act, we hold the Ordinances are preempted in their entirety.”
Because state law precludes the ordinances, the court did not take up the issue of whether they also violate the state constitution, an argument made by Attorney General Raúl Torrez in his challenge to the ordinances.
“The bottom line is simply this — abortion is safe and secure in New Mexico,” Torrez said Thursday morning in response to the court’s ruling. “It’s enshrined in law by the recent ruling by the New Mexico Supreme Court and thanks to the work of the New Mexico Legislature.”
As Source previously reported, abortion opponents in Texas pressured New Mexico officials to pass the ordinances as part of a larger legal strategy based on the obscure federal Comstock Act of 1873, which bans the mailing of abortion pills or abortion-related materials. The local governments passed the ordinances in the aftermath of the US Supreme Court’s June 2022 reversal of federal abortion rights.
“While the Ordinances restate the Comstock Act’s prohibitions, they do not, as Respondents claim, simply ‘parrot’ federal law,” the Court wrote in Thursday’s decision. “They go significantly beyond federal requirements by, among other things, purporting to regulate access to and licensure of so-called abortion clinics and physicians in a manner that prohibits or interferes with access to reproductive healthcare. Our Legislature’s adoption of the Health Care Freedom Act is an express rebuke of Respondents’ action. Indeed, the Legislature seemingly contemplated local dissent and ensured that any conflicting law would be expressly preempted by the Act.”
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.