The right to carry firearms openly or concealed has been restricted by the governor of New Mexico, on the basis of a public health “emergency” due to shootings of children. Asked whether her oath to uphold the Constitution precludes her unilateral action to restrict rights related to the Second Amendment, she responded at a press conference with sound bites about rights not being absolute.
She has declared that in areas with sufficiently high levels of gun violence, the rights to carry firearms are suspended. At present, this appears to apply only to Albuquerque and Bernalillo County.
“I’ve warned everyone that we expect a direct [legal] challenge, probably as you’re writing this we’re getting a challenge, and that’s the way it should work,” she acknowledged. “But I have to take a tough stand.”
Asked the obvious question, “Do you really think criminals are going to hear this message and not carry a gun in Albuquerque on the streets for 30 days?” she gave the only possible answer: “No.”
Is the use of what Governor Grisham is calling a public health emergency in a nation with widespread anger about actions taken so recently under the Covid public health emergency, designed to be provocative?
If everything is an emergency, who controls policy?
Even David Hogg, a leader of the March for Our Lives gun control movement and a survivor of the 2018 mass shooting at a Parkland, Florida school, spoke up to criticize Grisham: “I support gun safety but there is no such thing as a state public health emergency exception to the U.S. Constitution,” he said on X.
