SANTA FE, NM—Today, in a unanimous decision, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled that the New Mexico Constitution requires the state to allow same-sex couples to marry. The court ruled that county clerks must issue marriage licenses to otherwise qualified same-sex couples and that the State of New Mexico must respect the marriages of all same-sex couples, including those who married before today’s decision. The plaintiff couples were represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of New Mexico, the national ACLU, the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), the law firm of Sutin, Thayer & Browne APC, and New Mexico attorneys Maureen Sanders, N. Lynn Perls, and J. Kate Girard.

Writing for the court, Justice Edward Chavez said that “barring individuals from marrying and depriving them of the rights, protections, and responsibilities of civil marriage solely because of their sexual orientation violates the Equal Protection Clause under Article II, Section 18 of the New Mexico Constitution. We hold that the State of New Mexico is constitutionally required to allow same-gender couples to marry and must extend to them the rights, protections, and responsibilities that derive from civil marriage under New Mexico law.”

Said ACLU-New Mexico Legal Director Laura Schauer Ives:  “This truly is a historic and joyful day for New Mexico. As a state, we have always strived to treat all families with dignity and respect, and today’s decision allowing loving, committed same sex couples to marry continues that tradition. The more than 1000 same-sex couples who have already married in New Mexico can now rest certain knowing their marriages will be recognized and respected by our state.”

The six couples who are plaintiffs in the case filed a lawsuit seeking the freedom to marry in March 2013. In late August, Judge Alan Malott of the Second Judicial District Court in Albuquerque ordered the county clerks of Bernalillo and Santa Fe counties to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.  All 33 New Mexico County Clerks then intervened in the lawsuit and filed a petition asking the New Mexico Supreme Court to provide a statewide ruling on whether same-sex couples can marry. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and heard oral argument on October 23.

Before the New Mexico Supreme Court’s decision, county clerks in eight New Mexico counties had begun issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and hundreds of same-sex couples married in those counties over the past few months. Today’s ruling clarifies that those marriages are valid and must be respected by the state.

Said NCLR Legal Director Shannon Minter: “Today’s decision by the  New Mexico Supreme Court is a powerful affirmation that same-sex couples are equal members of New Mexico’s diverse culture and must be given the same legal protections and respect as other families. With this ruling, New Mexico joins 16 other states, the District of Columbia, and at least eight Native American tribes that permit same-sex couples to marry.  This is an important day, not only for New Mexico, but for the entire country.”

Added Elizabeth Gill, staff attorney with the ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Project:  “The past few years have seen an amazing show of support for the freedom to marry for all loving and committed couples. Today’s victory in New Mexico brings us one step closer to the day when marriage equality is a reality nationwide.”

###

 
 
The National Center for Lesbian Rights is a national legal organization committed to advancing the human and civil rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community through litigation, public policy advocacy, and public education. www.NCLRights.org

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of New Mexico works through the courts, legislature, and public education to protect and extend civil liberties in New Mexico. Founded in 1963, the ACLU of New Mexico is an affiliate of the national ACLU. www.ACLU-NM.org

For more than 90 years, the ACLU has been our nation's guardian of liberty, working in courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution and laws of the United States guarantee everyone in this country. www.ACLU.org

Suit Follows Year of Complaints and Lawsuits to Stop Abuses along the Border

EL PASO, TX – Agents with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CPB), working with medical professionals, subjected a U.S. citizen to a series of highly invasive searches—including rectal and vaginal probes—without a warrant, according to charges in a lawsuit filed today by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Texas and the ACLU of New Mexico.
 
CBP agents frisked and strip-searched the plaintiff at a border checkpoint, then transported her in handcuffs to the University Medical Center of El Paso, where doctors subjected her to an observed bowel movement, X-ray, speculum exam, rectal exam, vaginal exam, and a CT scan.  After a period of six hours of fruitless searches, the agents released the plaintiff without charge.
 
“What is truly frightening about this incident is that it could have happened to anyone,” said ACLU-NM Legal Director Laura Schauer Ives. “The failed drug war and militarized border region have created an environment in which law enforcement officials increasingly inflict extreme and illegal searches on innocent Americans. We need to ensure that no one is ever again subjected to a nightmare like our client suffered.”
 
The plaintiff, a 54 year old woman from New Mexico, was attempting to return to the U.S. from Mexico via a bridge in El Paso. She is deeply traumatized by the cavity searches  government agents forced her to endure and continues to suffer emotional and psychological after effects.
 
“Securing the border has become an excuse for outright abandonment of Constitutional principles that protect our privacy and dignity,” said Adriana Piñon, senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Texas.  “Enough is enough. The hand of the government should never have unfettered power to invade our most intimate bodily spaces.”
 
The suit comes as the nation debates a “border surge” that would further militarize border communities despite strong criticism of increased civil rights abuses along the border.  ACLU affiliates and other civil rights advocates along the Southwest border have challenged a pattern of unlawful conduct by local and federal law enforcement personnel this year:
 

• In November, 2013 an Albuquerque civil rights law firm filed suit after Deming, NM police officers subjected a man pulled over during a routine traffic stop to three enemas, two anal probes, and a colonoscopy—finding no drugs.
• In October 2013, the ACLU of Texas filed suit on behalf of a disabled U.S. citizen who was physically abused when she questioned a CPB official’s search of her purse.
• In March 2013, ten damages cases were filed alleging unlawful CBP conduct by an alliance of immigrant advocacy groups, private attorneys, and a law school clinic.

 
Attorneys with the ACLU of Texas and ACLU of New Mexico represent the plaintiff in the suit filed today. Because of the sensitive nature of the allegations, the suit was filed under a pseudonym.
 
View the complaint filed today in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, El Paso Division: https://www.aclu-nm.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Complaint-Jane-Doe-v-Various-Defendants-12-18-13.pdf
 

###

NMPA files amicus brief in Morris v. New Mexico in support of expanded end of life choices

ALBUQUERQUE, NM—Today, the New Mexico Psychological Association (NMPA) filed an amicus brief in support of Morris v. New Mexico, the lawsuit filed by the ACLU of New Mexico and Compassion & Choices’ that asks the court to clarify that physicians who provide aid in dying to  mentally competent, terminally ill patients do not violate New Mexico’s law against “assisting suicide.” The NMPA, the largest organization of professional doctorate-level psychologists in New Mexico and the leading source of professional standards and policy for psychologists who practice within the state, unequivocally states in its brief that aid in dying and suicide are fundamentally  different.

“The NMPA is affirming what most medical, health policy, and mental health professionals increasingly  acknowledge: aid in dying for mentally competent, terminally ill patients is no kind of suicide,” said Rob Schwartz, University of New Mexico law professor, nationally recognized authority on health law,  and co-author of the brief. ”We believe it is important that the law reflects this distinction so that doctors are not prevented from providing patients with more comfort and control during their dying process.”

The NMPA states:

The NMPA and its members recognize that AID [aid in dying] and suicide are fundamentally different psychological phenomena, and that these different categories of patients must be treated differently by the law for their patients to be able to get adequate psychological support at the end of life. Psychologists think of suicide as their greatest challenge, and they work tirelessly to prevent their patients from committing suicide.  They also recognize that AID involves almost no substantive theoretical overlap with suicide…

“Medical, mental health, and health policy experts recognize that the choice of a dying patient for a peaceful death through aid in dying  is no kind of ‘suicide’. This case asks the court to recognize this, so that physicians in NM willing to provide aid in dying to their mentally competent, terminally ill patients feel safe doing so,” said Kathryn Tucker, Director of Legal Affairs and Advocacy for Compassion & Choices. “The growing support for  aid in dying is evident. Five states already allow patients to seek aid in dying if they find their dying process becomes unbearable, and this week we will argue before the court that New Mexico law does not prohibit this practice.”

The ACLU of New Mexico and Compassion & Choices will take Morris v. New Mexico to trial on Wednesday, December 11 and Thursday, December 12 in New Mexico’s 2^nd Judicial District.

Read the NMPA’s amicus brief here.