Arguments on governor’s vetoes slated
Democratic lawmakers contend Martinez’s failure to include reasons for rejection means bills should be laws
A state district judge in Santa Fe is scheduled to hear arguments Friday on whether 10 bills that Gov. Susana Martinez vetoed before the end of this year’s regular legislative session should become law because she didn’t say why she rejected them.
The lawsuit represents the last major unresolved issue between Democratic leaders in the Legislature and the Republican governor stemming from the contentious lawmaking session, which was the two-term governor’s final 60-day session.
Among the bills in question are two that would legalize state research on industrial hemp, which backers contend is a potentially important cash crop for New Mexico but which Martinez two years ago said might be confusing to law enforcement agencies because of its similar appearance to the marijuana plant.
State District Judge Sarah Singleton will preside at Friday’s hearing. But whichever way she decides, the losing side almost certainly will appeal the case, which asks the courts to declare that the governor didn’t follow a requirement in the state constitution.
The lawmakers’ suit points to a section of the constitution that says once a bill is passed by the Legislature and presented to the governor, “If he approves, he shall sign it, and deposit it with the secretary of state; otherwise, he shall return it to the house in which it originated, with his objections.”
The complaint cites a Colorado Supreme Court decision in a similar case from the early 1990s.
Colorado has a provision in its state constitution like the
one at issue in New Mexico.
In filing the suit in May, legislative leaders said in a joint statement, “Effective governing requires clear communication between the executive and legislative branches.
Although those bills passed both chambers with strong bipartisan support, the Legislature remains in the dark regarding Gov. Martinez’s objections to those bills she attempted to veto.”
The legislators asked the judge to declare the governor’s vetoes invalid and rule that the legislation in question therefore should become law.
In her formal response last month, Martinez’s lawyer, Paul Kennedy of Albuquerque, argued that the state constitution “does not expressly state that the governor must return a bill ‘with objections’ during the relevant three-day period in order to preclude it from becoming law. … Gov. Martinez denies that her return of any of the bills were ‘out of compliance with the strict requirements of the constitution.’ ”
In addition to the hemp bills is legislation that would allow high school students to count computer science courses toward the math or science credits needed to graduate. Other bills would amend the policy for awarding scholarships to medical students who promise to work in underserved areas, give local governments a new option to pay for the expansion of broadband access and keep open a program that pays for technology upgrades at public schools.
Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, a Democrat who is named in the suit, has declined to chapter the bills into law, saying the court should decide. If the court action is successful, Toulouse Oliver would be compelled to take that action.
Martinez and the Legislature clashed repeatedly this year in the session that ended in March.
The governor vetoed more than 140 bills, which is more than half the number of bills signed. She also line-item vetoed the entire budgets for colleges and universities in the state and the entire legislative branch, forcing a short special session in May to pass a new budget.