Taos citizens protected by First Amendment in recall push, state Supreme Court rules
there were sufficient facts to allow a recall effort to proceed.
By law, a hearing was supposed to have been held within 10 days, but the hearing was continued twice at the petitioners’ request and wasn’t scheduled until about four months later, according to court documents. On the day the hearing was to be held, Citizens for Quality Education voluntarily dismissed their petition, so no determination was ever made of whether there were adequate facts to proceed with a recall. Two days later Cordova sued.
The citizens convinced a state district judge to dismiss Cordova’s lawsuits, finding the group’s efforts were protected by the anti-SLAPP law.
Cordova appealed to the state Court of Appeals. Then-Justice Roderick Kennedy overturned the District Court’s dismissal of Cordova’s lawsuits on the grounds that the recall petition process was a judicial process, not a “quasi-judicial process” such as a school board meeting as described in the anti-SLAPP statute.
Armstrong and fellow attorney Samuel Herrera appealed that decision to the state Supreme Court, which on Monday, in an opinion authored by Justice Barbara Vigil, ruled that the District Court got it right and that the citizens are entitled to collect attorney’s fees from Cordova.
“To hold that … the people cannot freely inform the government of their wishes … would raise important constitutional questions,” Vigil wrote, quoting a precedent-setting federal case on the matter. “The right of petition is one of the freedoms protected by the Bill of Rights.”
Armstrong said she celebrated the decision with “a little dance. We had been waiting so long for this result.”
Without the state statute and the First Amendment, Armstrong said, “there would be nothing to prevent someone from suing you for coming to a public meeting and saying ‘Don’t build that Wal-Mart down the street from my house.’ It’s particularly important as it comes now with so many grassroots protests going on. So many people experimenting with the way they can make their voices heard and seek redress of grievances.”
Armstrong declined to speculate on how much her client, a parent named Jill Cline, might seek for legal fees in the case, which has been pending in some form or another for nearly a decade.
Cordova, 73, who ended up serving out his term but didn’t seek re-election, said Monday he wasn’t aware of the state Supreme Court ruling until he was contacted by The New Mexican. He said he didn’t want to comment until he has read the decision.