No drug test for 'Rust' movie armorer in upcoming trial over fatal shooting by Alec Baldwin- Associated Press
The former weapons supervisor on the set of the movie "Rust" won't have to take a drug test as she confronts felony charges of evidence tampering and involuntary manslaughter in the on-set shooting death of a cinematographer by actor Alec Baldwin.
A New Mexico district court judge on Wednesday dismissed a request from prosecutors to test Hannah Gutierrez-Reed for illegal drugs, calling it "an ambush" against her defense lawyers.
Prosecutors say Gutierrez-Reed passed narcotics to another person to avoid legal consequences in the immediate aftermath of the fatal shooting in October 2021, while contending in court documents that the armorer was likely hungover on the day a live bullet was placed into the gun Baldwin used.
Defense attorney Jason Bowles said the drug use allegations are unsubstantiated and undocumented.
It's still unclear how several live rounds of ammunition got on set. Prosecutors say they have some evidence to support the theory that Gutierrez-Reed may be responsible for the introduction of the rounds.
Wednesday's hearing, held online, was the first for a recently filed felony charge against Gutierrez-Reed of tampering with evidence in the shooting, which killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and wounded director Joel Souza.
State District Court Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer advised Gutierrez-Reed of her legal rights on the evidence-tampering charge, which carries a possible penalty of up to 18 months in prison. Gutierrez-Reed did not enter a plea.
An involuntary manslaughter charge against Baldwin was dropped in April. The actor was pointing a gun at Hutchins when it went off, killing her.
Baldwin has said the gun fired accidentally after he followed instructions to aim it toward Hutchins, who was behind the camera.
Evidentiary hearings may take place as soon as August to determine whether the case against Gutierrez-Reed advances toward trial.
Additionally, Gutierrez-Reed still has access to guns as a self-defense measure against threats — something prosecutors raised as a concern during Wednesday's online court hearing.
"We have a person who is a substance user who is in possession of firearms," said special prosecutor Kari Morrissey.
Gutierrez-Reed's lawyers say prosecutors are resorting to "character assassination" to prop up their involuntary manslaughter case.
The filming of "Rust" resumed in April in Montana under an agreement with the cinematographer's widower, Matthew Hutchins, that makes him an executive producer. Souza says he returned to directing "Rust" to honor the legacy of Halyna Hutchins.
New Mexico plans to expand pre-kindergarten slots, increase pre-K teacher pay- Albuquerque Journal
New Mexico will boost the pay of prekindergarten teachers and sharply expand the number of pre-K slots available to families as it puts to use an injection of new funding, state officials say.
Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham made the announcement Wednesday during a speech at the White House, where she pitched early childhood education as a critical strategy for interrupting the cycle of poverty in New Mexico.
Addressing state legislators and other officials from 41 states, Lujan Grisham said a constitutional amendment approved by voters last year will make extra funding available for early childhood programs. Nearly $100 million, she said, will go toward expanding instructional hours and boosting teacher pay.
As part of the increase, the number of pre-K slots funded by the state will jump by more than 3,000 in the coming school year, a 21% bump over last year, according to the Early Childhood Education and Care Department.
"It's going to make a difference for the families of New Mexico who can't wait one more second for the kinds of support and services that they need," the governor said.
In her speech, Lujan Grisham, a Democrat who won reelection last year, said policymakers of both parties in New Mexico recognize the importance of ensuring kids start kindergarten ready to thrive.
The debate, instead, has focused on what funding source should be used to cover the cost of expanding pre-K, home visiting programs for new parents, child care assistance and similar programs, she said.
The state has increased annual withdrawals out of its permanent school fund, established an early childhood trust fund and dedicated increased general funding to early childhood programs.
The extra distribution out of the permanent fund — an endowment of sorts — is expected to generate $240 million a year for early childhood and K-12 education. It was approved by lawmakers and voters after a decade of debate.
Republican legislators opposed the withdrawal, saying it would slow the growth of the endowment and ultimately lead to less money than if the fund had been left alone. Democrats pitched it as a worthwhile investment that can make long-lasting improvements in academic achievement.
A peer-reviewed analysis by staff for the Legislative Finance Committee found pre-K participation in New Mexico is associated with increased reading and math proficiency and higher high school graduation rates.
"For a state where parents have been poor and kids have been disadvantaged," Lujan Grisham said at the White House event, "this impact is the New Mexico miracle, and it can happen all across the country."
With help from the increased funding, early childhood educators who have a bachelor's degree will make at least $50,000 a year, state officials.
New Mexico children face deep challenges. A report released this month by the Annie E. Casey Foundation ranked the state last in the nation for child well-being — a ranking that took into account New Mexico’s worsening rates of reading and math proficiency among students from 2019 to 2022.
The state has ranked 50th or 49th every year since 2012, according to New Mexico Voices for Children, an advocacy group that supports expanding early childhood education.
Biden administration tells judge that its new asylum rule is not a reboot of Trump's efforts- Associated Press
The Biden administration argued Wednesday that its new asylum rule is different from versions put forward under President Donald Trump in a court hearing before a judge who threw out Trump's attempts to limit asylum on the U.S.-Mexico border.
"2023 is not 2019," said Erez Reuveni, the Department of Justice lawyer who argued the case.
The rule makes it extremely difficult for migrants who come directly to the southern border to get asylum unless they use a government app to make an appointment or they have already tried to seek protection in a country they passed through on their way to the U.S.
Opponents say it's essentially a rehash of Trump efforts — a question that gave the online hearing Wednesday a sense of deja vu. The San Francisco-based federal judge who will decide the case, Jon S. Tigar, ruled against the Trump administration's two attempts to limit asylum.
President Joe Biden's administration instituted its rule on May 11 with the expiration of a COVID-19 restriction known as Title 42 that had limited asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border. The lawsuit challenging the new rule is being heard as congressional Republicans are attacking the administration for what they say is a failure to control the roughly 2,000-mile (3,220-kilometer) border with Mexico.
The administration argues that its rule encourages migrants to use lawful pathways into the U.S. and prevents chaos at the border. But immigration rights groups suing to get rid of it say it endangers migrants and is illegal.
At the outset of Wednesday's hearing, Tigar said he would have more questions for the government than the groups trying to stop the asylum rule. He also referenced his history with Trump's attempts to limit asylum.
"I read somewhere that 2023 would be a good year for sequels," Tigar told Reuveni as the lawyer prepared to begin his arguments.
Reuveni argued that the Biden rule is different from Trump's attempts to limit asylum, noting that exceptions are being granted at a rate of 9%.
"This is not a toothless exception," he said.
Katrina Eiland, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, which is representing the immigrant rights organizations who sued over the Biden rule, argued Wednesday that it violates immigration law that allows people to seek asylum wherever they arrive on the border.
"Thousands of people with valid claims ... have been ordered removed and in many cases removed to likely persecution. This rule has consequences," Eiland said.
Tigar was appointed by President Barack Obama. Trump derided him an "Obama judge" after Tigar rejected a policy barring people from applying for asylum except at an official border entry point. Trump's remark prompted U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to weigh in to defend the impartiality of judges.
Tigar also ruled against the Trump administration's efforts to limit asylum to people who don't apply for protection in a country they travel through before coming to the U.S. The measure would have applied to children traveling alone, while the Biden rule does not.
The Supreme Court eventually allowed that Trump rule to go into effect. But the one barring people from applying for asylum except at an official border entry point was caught up in litigation and never took effect.
Immigrant rights group say the Biden rule forces migrants to seek protection in countries that don't have the same robust asylum system and human rights protections as the United States and leaves them in a dangerous limbo. They also argue that the CBP One app that the government wants migrants to use doesn't have enough appointments and isn't available in enough languages.
But Reuveni argued that there has been real progress in other countries such as Mexico, Belize and Costa Rica so that migrants can seek protection there.
He also took exception to the criticism of the app and other ways that the administration has used to provide legal pathways to migrants coming into the country. Just recently the government increased daily appointments via the app to 1,450, which is more than 500,000 people a year.
Reuveni noted that a program the government started in January grants parole to as much as 360,000 people a year from four specific countries. Republican-aligned states have their own lawsuit over that program.
All of those measures, Reuveni said, means it's "really unfair to suggest that there's no way to get your foot in the door."
Reuveni noted that encounters at the southern border have dropped significantly since Title 42 went away and the rule as well as other measures went into place. He emphasized that while this rule isn't the only reason for the drop, the government does consider it to be a "strong contributing factor."
Whatever Tigar decides, the case will certainly be appealed.
Reuveni at one point told Tigar that the administration was arguing on the "assumption you're going to rule against us totally."
The administration won't have to wait long to find out.
Tigar estimated he would take a week or less to issue a ruling. He said if he rules against the government, he will honor the administration's request that such a decision not take effect for 14 days to give it time to appeal.
US Interior Department chooses new water and science deputy to focus on drought resilience- Associated Press
The U.S. Interior Department has tapped an official with the federal government's water management bureau to serve as a deputy assistant secretary for water and science.
The Department announced the appointment of Michael Brain on Wednesday. He replaces Tanya Trujillo, who recently resigned after playing a key role in negotiations over the shrinking Colorado River.
The leadership change comes as the states, cities and farmers that rely on the Colorado River struggle to decide how to reduce their use. In August, the Interior Department will offer its annual analysis on the health of the river and announce if there will be additional cuts in the coming year.
In recent years the federal government has lowered some states' water allocations and offered billions of dollars to farmers, cities and others to cut back. But key water officials — including Trujillo — didn't see those efforts as enough to prevent the system from collapsing.
In his new role, Brain will help the Interior Department as it addresses drought resilience and funnels more money toward infrastructure projects.
Brain had served as deputy commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation since March 2022, overseeing media and congressional relations. He previously worked as a congressional staffer focusing on water and environmental issues and helping to develop funding bills related to water policy.
Brain has a law degree in urban planning, land use and environmental law from Saint Louis University and a bachelor's in political science and government from Boston College.
Witnesses testify Krebs ordered them to move money to cover losses from golf trip- Source New Mexico
Twelve people took the witness stand on Tuesday, giving jurors insight into the golf trip and the subsequent budget maneuvering to cover losses that led to embezzlement charges for former University of New Mexico athletic director Paul Krebs.
Jurors heard from people who went to Scotland with Krebs in 2015 as part of a fundraiser he hosted with the Lobo Club, the group responsible for taking donations for Lobo athletics, and people responsible for the business accounts that he used to cover his losses.
There wasn’t much surprise from the details of the trip that included world-class hospitality, fine dining and play on prestige golf courses for some of the university’s top donors. However, there were some clear red flags about how Krebs moved money from the athletic department’s budget into the Lobo Club, the women responsible for following the order from Kreb testified.
Because Krebs lost money on the deposit he made to set up the trip, he allegedly moved money from what was described as a “contingency” fund set up under the UNM athletics budget, to the Lobo Club, an entity that can only take private donations, not taxpayers dollars from any university budget, athletics included.
Krebs is facing one count of embezzlement over $25,000 and another count of embezzlement of more than $2,500 but under $25,000, each second degree felonies that could bring jail time and a hefty fine.
Yvonne Otts, UNM athletics department director of business operations, shared a bit of the process that she followed under Krebs direction, to move the money from one account to another. Prosecutors showed her an email from July 2015 where Krebs told Otts, “We need to reimburse the Lobo Club for $13,625 out of the contingency fund.”
“It was business as usual,” she told the jury.
Otts said athletics has more than 150 different accounts to cover costs for things such as student athlete expenses, utilities fees and events.
She said each year UNM athletics sets aside $100,000 for this contingency fund to cover “unanticipated expenses.”
Prosecutors asked her if this amount of money was unusually high. “If it happened it was not to this amount of money,” she said.
From there the jury heard from the next in line responsible for transferring the funds under Krebs direction: former Lobo Club financial coordinator Valerie Arbogast.
Arbogast worked in that position with the Lobo Club from July 2010 to April 2018 and said she was the sole person to make sure donations were accounted for and ensure financial books were within the Lobo Club budget.
While she did report directly to the club’s executive director, she said the athletic department did have a large influence on projects and fundraisers.
After Otts got the directive from Krebs, she then emailed Arbogast asking her to process the request to move the money from the athletic department to the Lobo Club. This was a red flag for Arbogast, she testified.
“I wondered why (Otts) didn’t do it,” she told the jury. “I thought it was strange she didn’t make the transfer.”
Prosecutors are trying to set up the argument that Krebs had intent to break university policy in his alleged embezzlement scheme.
They attempted to establish this further through testimony from Sidney Mason-Coon, a policy officer at the University of New Mexico.
However, before prosecutors could make their point, Kreb’s attorneys objected to her testimony. Judge Cindy Leos ordered the jury to leave the room to allow the attorney’s to make their arguments.
They argued that establishing Kreb’s intent to break the law by violating university policies, would muddle the opinion of the jury since it does not fit within their definition of embezzlement, meaning taking something for personal gain.
Judge Leos then sent the jury home and gave both sides until tomorrow morning to present arguments for whether or not Mason-Coon should remain on the witness stand.
The trial, expected to last through Friday, will resume Wednesday at 9 a.m. in the Second Judicial District Court in downtown Albuquerque.
Television cameras from local news stations will likely not be present tomorrow morning. Before court resumed after lunch, Judge Leos made the pool photographer from KOAT pack up his equipment, banning local TV news from filming the proceedings.
Leos said the photographer violated the rules of decorum by filming footage during breaks in the trial, and getting close up images of documents on the table where defense attorneys are sitting.
Only one video camera is typically allowed in courtrooms, so the three local TV stations set up a pool situation to record what is being filmed inside. Leos said KRQE and KOB also violated the rules by live streaming the proceedings on their websites without permission.
Leos allowed reporters from the television stations to remain in the courtroom, along with reporters from Source New Mexico, The Albuquerque Journal and The Santa Fe New Mexican. Still photography is also still permitted.
'Oppenheimer' stirs up conflicted history for Los Alamos and New Mexico downwinders - By Susan Montoya Bryan Associated Press
The movie about a man who changed the course of the world's history by shepherding the development of the first atomic bomb is expected to be a blockbuster, dramatic and full of suspense.
On the sidelines will be a community downwind from the testing site in the southern New Mexico desert, the impacts of which the U.S. government never has fully acknowledged. The movie on the life of scientist J. Robert Oppenheimer and the top-secret work of the Manhattan Project sheds no light on those residents' pain.
"They'll never reflect on the fact that New Mexicans gave their lives. They did the dirtiest of jobs. They invaded our lives and our lands and then they left," Tina Cordova, a cancer survivor and founder of a group of New Mexico downwinders, said of the scientists and military officials who established a secret city in Los Alamos during the 1940s and tested their work at the Trinity Site some 200 miles (322 kilometers) away.
Cordova's group, the Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium, has been working with the Union of Concerned Scientists and others for years to bring attention to what the Manhattan Project did to people in New Mexico.
While film critics celebrate "Oppenheimer" and officials in Los Alamos prepare for the spotlight to be on their town, downwinders remain frustrated with the U.S. government — and now movie producers — for not recognizing their plight.
Advocates held vigils Saturday on the 78th anniversary of the Trinity Test in New Mexico and in New York City, where director Christopher Nolan and others participated in a panel discussion following a special screening of the film.
Nolan has called the Trinity Test an extraordinary moment in human history.
"I wanted to take the audience into that room and be there for when that button is pushed and really fully bring the audience to this moment in time," he said in a clip being used by Universal Studios to promote the film.
The movie is based on Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin's Pulitzer Prize-winning "American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer." Nolan has said Oppenheimer's story is both a dream and a nightmare.
Lilly Adams, a senior outreach coordinator with the Union of Concerned Scientists, participated in the New York City vigil and said it was meant to show support for New Mexicans who have been affected.
"The human cost of Oppenheimer's Trinity Test, and all nuclear weapons activities, is a crucial part of the conversation around U.S. nuclear legacy," she told The Associated Press in an email. "We have to reckon with this human cost to fully understand Oppenheimer's legacy and the harm caused by nuclear weapons."
In developing and testing nuclear weapons, Adams said the U.S. government effectively "poisoned its own people, many of whom are still waiting for recognition and justice."
Adams and others have said they hope that those involved in making "Oppenheimer" help raise awareness about the downwinders, who have not been added to the list of those covered by the federal government's compensation program for people exposed to radiation.
Government officials chose the Trinity Test Site because it was remote, flat and had predictable winds. Due to the secret nature of the project, residents in surrounding areas were not warned.
The Tularosa Basin was home to a rural population that lived off the land by raising livestock and tending to gardens and farms. They drew water from cisterns and holding ponds. They had no idea that the fine ash that settled on everything in the days following the explosion was from the world's first atomic blast.
The government initially tried to hide it, saying that an explosion at a munitions dump caused the rumble and bright light, which could be seen more than 160 miles (257 kilometers) away.
It wasn't until the U.S. dropped bombs on Japan weeks later that New Mexico residents realized what they had witnessed.
According to the Manhattan Project National Historical Park, large amounts of radiation shot up into the atmosphere and fallout descended over an area about 250 miles (402 kilometers) long and 200 miles (322 kilometers) wide. Scientists tracked part of the fallout pattern as far as the Atlantic Ocean, but the greatest concentration settled about 30 miles (48 kilometers) from the test site.
For Cordova and younger generations who are dealing with cancer, the lack of acknowledgement by the government and those involved with the film is inexcusable.
"We were left here to live with the consequences," Cordova said. "And they'll over-glorify the science and the scientists and make no mention of us. And you know what? Shame on them."
In Los Alamos, more than 200 miles (321 kilometers) north of the Tularosa Basin, reaction to the film has been much different. The legacy of Oppenheimer and the Manhattan Project means Los Alamos is home to one of the nation's premier national laboratories and has the highest percentage of people with doctorate degrees in the U.S.
Oppenheimer Drive cuts through the heart of Los Alamos, Hoppenheimer IPA is on tap at a local brewery and the physicist is the focus of an exhibit at the science museum, where some of his handwritten notes and ID card are displayed.
The city is hosting an Oppenheimer Festival that starts Thursday and runs through the end of July.
About 200 extras used in the film were locals, many of them Los Alamos National Laboratory employees.
During breaks, conversations among the extras centered on science and world problems, said Kelly Stewart, who works with Los Alamos County's economic development division and was the film liaison when Nolan and his crew were on location at historic sites around town.
There's a pride that's woven into the town's DNA, Stewart said, and it revolves around the lab's work to address national security and global concerns.
The goal is to position Los Alamos as a place where people can begin to learn "the true stories" behind the events depicted in the film, Stewart said.
The county's "Project Oppenheimer" effort began in early 2023 and has included forums, documentaries, art installations and exhibits to educate visitors about the science happening at the lab as well as the social implications of the Manhattan Project.
A special area will be set up during the festival where people can discuss the movie after seeing it.
She believes efforts to help people understand the community's history will continue.
"There's a huge interest here in our own community to keep revisiting that and discussing it," she said.
San Juan Generating Station to be discussed at PRC’s first closed-door meeting under new policy - Megan Gleason, Source New Mexico
Despite transparency concerns from government watchdogs, the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission is holding a private meeting this week in place of the weekly public meetings it used to have.
Commissioners are supposed to discuss the Public Service Company of New Mexico’s abandonment of San Juan Generating Station units, but members of the public won’t be able to listen in. The PRC argues there are litigation privacy concerns.
HOW DOES THE PRC AFFECT ME?
The state’s Public Regulation Commission regulates utilities, telecommunications and motor carriers. It ensures that these industries are following operation standards and charging New Mexicans fair rates on things like electricity bills.
On June 21, commissioners decided to transition from one public meeting per week to one public meeting every two weeks. On the weeks meetings aren’t held, the officials can decide to hold meetings closed to the public instead.
Commissioners have said that biweekly meetings would give them and their advisory staff more time to consider and make changes to complex issues that come to the PRC.
The day after the commissioners voted unanimously to move forward with this new schedule, the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government released a statement saying transparency issues could arise from this.
“To simply announce that every other meeting will be closed seems not to take into consideration whether all items discussed will fall under the Open Meetings Act (OMA) exceptions,” the Foundation said.
The Foundation urged the commission to reconsider and open all the meetings. When commissioners changed the schedule, Commissioner James Ellison said this isn’t an irreversible decision.
The schedule remains biweekly. The first Thursday meeting was July 13.
This week, there’s a closed meeting planned for Thursday, July 20.
There are a few different reasons public bodies can hold closed meetings, including discussions on litigation, limited personnel, licensing or adjudicatory proceedings. The reason for an executive meeting must be publicly disclosed.
The PRC listed litigation as the reason for Thursday’s closed meaning where commissioners are supposed to talk about unit shutdowns at PNM’s San Juan Generating Station.
It’s a legal matter dating back to 2022 when PNM shut down coal plant generators but kept charging customers the same rates for the stations, despite originally saying people’s bills would decrease. The PRC ordered the utility to give its customers refunds through credits on bills.
PNM fought the order by appealing it with the state Supreme Court in June 2022. The court is still looking into it.
Other environmental advocacy organizations as well as the New Mexico Office of the Attorney General have gotten involved in the legal fight, too.
No details besides the general case topic are listed on Thursday’s agenda.
The Foundation for Open Government reminded the PRC that commissioners can’t take any action in a closed meeting.
Updating the Open Meetings Act policy
More transparency matters came up last week when the Public Regulation Commission approved revisions to its Open Meetings Act policy, mainly shortening the policy’s length.
TRANSPARENCY BY LAW
The Open Meetings Act is a New Mexico law that requires public bodies to conduct business in a clear manner that’s accessible to the public.
The previous policy was originally adopted in 2013, PRC spokesperson Patrick Rodriguez said.
He didn’t respond to an inquiry on if the transparency concerns spurred last week’s policy change, though he sent a news release that the commission changed the open meetings policy “to boost transparency, efficiency and productivity.”
Scott Cameron, PRC attorney, said on July 13 that the commission, the same as any other entities that follow the Open Meetings Act, has to annually adopt “a statement of what notice is reasonable.”
He said he used the state attorney general’s template to update the PRC’s policy, which now outlines the updated biweekly meeting schedule.
It went from the 13 pages in the decade-old policy to three pages.
Cameron said the policy was shortened because commissioners requested it be streamlined in accordance with what the Open Meetings Act requires.
Commissioner Pat O’Connell said the former policy had a lot of repetition. He and Commissioner Gabriel Aguilera said they appreciate the brevity of this version.
Aguilera still had a few concerns with some of the content in the updated policy.
Cameron’s proposed policy would allow either the chairperson or a majority of the commissioners to call a meeting outside of the regular biweekly schedule. Aguilera said any of the officials should be able to call a meeting outside of the regular schedule, if needed.
“In an emergency situation where health, safety or property of the citizens is threatened, I think it would be better for any commissioner to be able to suggest an emergency meeting,” he said.
O’Connell said he’s fine removing the chairperson’s authority to call a meeting outside of the biweekly schedule but wants to maintain the majority approval required so there’s a consensus that the meetings are a valuable use of everyone’s time.
So the commissioners approved the removal of the chairperson’s sole authority to call a special meeting, leaving the stipulation that at least two of three members have to agree to call a non-regular meeting.
Statehouse leaders to assert ‘legislative privilege’ in redistricting lawsuit - Austin Fisher, Source New Mexico
As a state district court judge decides whether New Mexico’s congressional map signed into law in 2021 is a partisan gerrymander, he will have to figure out a way to properly question the lawmakers who drew it.
Ninth Judicial District Court Judge Fred Van Soelen met by phone on Monday morning with attorneys representing the Republican Party of New Mexico and government officials representing the governor’s office and the statehouse.
Carter Harrison was one of the attorneys who appeared on behalf of the New Mexico GOP, which argues that the new map “cracked” a Republican voting bloc in the southeastern part of the state, making it harder for a Republican candidate to win the Congressional District 2 seat in the U.S. House of Representatives.
In 2022, under the redrawn maps, southern New Mexico Democrat Gabe Vasquez won the congressional district by 1,346 votes. All three of the state’s federal delegates in the U.S. House are Democrats.
Van Soelen in April 2022 refused to dismiss the lawsuit, and Democratic leaders that July asked the state Supreme Court to decide whether the state’s courts have the power to weigh in on cases like this one.
The justices on July 5 found state courts do have that power, ruled in favor of the GOP, and sent the case back down to Van Soelen.
LAWMAKERS TO ASSERT ‘LEGISLATIVE PRIVILEGE’
The justices ordered him to review the Republican Party’s claims using a three-part test: whether the lawmakers intentionally tried to dilute the votes of their opponents, whether they succeeded, and whether they had any legitimate, nonpartisan reasons for the way they drew the maps.
Answering these questions may prove difficult because New Mexico’s constitution makes evidence of “legislative actions” inadmissible in court in most circumstances.
The state constitution says lawmakers “shall not be questioned in any other place for any speech or debate or for any vote cast” in the House or Senate. In previous cases, for example, emails between a lawmaker and his staff were considered privileged.
Harrison said one issue he knows will come up in discovery will be “the assertion of legislative privilege under the Speech and Debate clause of the state constitution.”
Richard Olson appeared on behalf of Senate President Pro Tempore Mimi Stewart and House Speaker Javier Martinez.
He said there are two areas where legislative privilege is going to come up, but only mentioned one during the meeting on Monday, having to do with “discovery directed toward documentary evidence.”
One way of handling it, Harrison said, would be for lawmakers to testify in depositions outside the courthouse, assert the privilege on a question-by-question basis, and for the GOP to formally compel them to answer if they feel it is appropriate.
Another way of doing it, Harrison said, would be for the court to appoint a special master. The special master would be called on to resolve any disputes about legislative privilege coming out of the depositions, Olson said.
“I don’t think that I’ll have an issue with it,” Van Soelen said, referring to appointing a special master. “That might be something where a special master would be helpful.”
The order contains four names of possible candidates to take the appointment, Harrison said.
Van Soelen said he received an email with a proposed scheduling order, but by Monday afternoon the order had not been published in the online court records system.
ELECTION CLOCK TICKING
The state Supreme Court gave Van Soelen until Oct. 1 to decide the case.
The time issue is “comin’ up quick,” he said.
“The Supreme Court has given us a short time window, and I understand why, and we’ll do everything we can to follow through on that,” the judge said.
The state’s election administrators have said they need the maps dealt with by then so candidates and voters will be ready for the 2024 primary election.
Harrison said the order lays out proposed expert disclosure deadlines, and that both sides think it would be helpful for an expert to weigh in.
Olson said the parties would need two to three full days for the hearing to include testimony from “probably multiple experts” and “various fact witnesses.”
Harrison said the order gives the judge the option of deciding the issues based only on written submissions, or if he wants he could conduct a bench trial that would entail live testimony from any witness he wants to question.
A key part of Biden's strategy to control immigration at the US-Mexico border gets a court hearing - By Rebecca Santana Associated Press
A judge will hear arguments Wednesday in a lawsuit opposing an asylum rule that is a key part of the Biden administration's immigration policy. Critics say the rule endangers migrants trying to cross the southern border and is against the law, while the administration argues that it encourages migrants to use lawful pathways into the U.S. and prevents chaos at the southern border.
The new rule took effect May 11 with the expiration of a COVID-19 restriction known as Title 42 that had limited asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border. The new rule makes it extremely difficult for migrants who come directly to the southern border to get asylum unless they use a government app to get an appointment or they've already tried to seek protection in another country before coming to the U.S. It includes room for exceptions and would not apply to children traveling alone.
The lawsuit threatens to undermine a key tool that President Joe Biden's administration has relied on to manage immigration as congressional Republicans attack the administration for what they say is a failure to control the roughly 2,000-mile (3,220-kilometer) border with Mexico. Republicans see immigration as a key issue in next year's presidential election.
A group of immigrant rights organizations that sued argues the new rule violates immigration law that allows people to seek asylum wherever they arrive on the border. The groups argue that it forces migrants to seek protection in countries that don't have the same robust asylum system and human rights protections as the United States and leaves them in a dangerous limbo.
"The rule is already inflicting untold suffering on thousands of asylum seekers, who are either being deported to persecution or stranded in Mexican states where migrants face horrific and pervasive violence," the groups argue in court filings.
They also argue that the CBP One app that the government wants migrants to use to set up appointments is faulty. It doesn't have enough appointments and isn't available in enough languages, they argue.
Also, opponents say the Biden rule is essentially a rehash of efforts by President Donald Trump to limit immigration at the southern border. A federal appeals court prevented those similar but stricter measures from taking effect.
The Biden administration has argued that the asylum rule is not a rehash of Trump's efforts but part of an overall strategy that provides a way into the U.S. for those who follow legal pathways and consequences for those who don't. They also argue that the new asylum rule was needed because it took effect when immigration numbers at the southern border were expected to skyrocket when Title 42's use went away. And, they say, the strategy is working. The number of border crossings peaked ahead of the end of Title 42 and then fell.
As for legal pathways, the government points to a program it created in January that allows 30,000 people a month to enter the country from Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti and Venezuela if they have a sponsor and fly into an airport. Advocates for immigrants note that program covers only four countries.
Separately, Republican-aligned states are suing over that January program. A trial is slated for late August.
Pilot dies after plane crashes into home near Santa Fe- Albuquerque Journal
The pilot of a small plane was killed when it crashed into a home near Santa Fe Monday morning.
Wilson Silver, a spokesperson for New Mexico State Police, said the twin-engine Cessna crashed shortly after takeoff from the Santa Fe Regional Airport.
The plane left the airport a little after 9 a.m. and was on its way to Santa Monica, California.
Shortly after takeoff, the pilot radioed back to the tower to report a left-engine failure. The plane went down about 30 seconds later, striking an unoccupied home on Agua de Oro.
Police have not confirmed the identity of the deceased pilot yet.
Opening arguments begin in embezzlement trial against former UNM athletics director- Shaun Griswold, Source New Mexico
Paul Krebs, the former athletic director for the University of New Mexico is facing two counts of embezzlement- one for over 25 thousand dollars and the other for 25 hundred dollars-both are second degree felonies.
Yesterday, Krebs faced potential jurors in the morning and then heard opening statements from a prosecutor with the New Mexico’s Attorney General’s Office.
Dozens of supporters sat behind Krebs.
Prosecutors in August 2019 alleged Krebs used his position as athletic director to move thousands from that budget, funded by state taxpayers, to pay for a Scotland golf trip that was designed to be a fundraiser for the Lobo Club, one of the university’s non-profit organizations that receives private donations for Lobo athletics.
Krebs attorneys are centering their argument not on whether he broke university policy but if he broke the law.
Judge Cindy Leos dismissed four charges on Krebs back in June because evidence was insufficient.
The courtroom heard testimonies today from individuals that were directly involved in convincing donors to attend the golfing trip as well as attendees.
Judge Leos also barred television cameras and crews from her courtroom after she learned that two Albuquerque stations had been livestreaming without her permission.
She barred reporters and crews from all three Albuquerque television stations from the courtroom. But allowed the Albuquerque Journal and Santa Fe New Mexican to remain in the courtroom.
In 2015, Kole McKamey traveled to Scotland for the golf trip of a lifetime with people who could drastically change the direction of athletics at the University of New Mexico with a very high-dollar donation.
This week, he’s on the witness stand in the Second Judicial District courtroom testifying in a case against the organizer of the event, Paul Krebs, the former athletic director at New Mexico’s largest university who now faces two counts of embezzlement.
Krebs sat with his two attorneys at the defense table dressed in a dark blazer, light pants and silver and cherry tie that is a slight hue away from the cherry he was typically fashioned with at Lobos games.
He is charged with one count of embezzlement over $25,000 and another count of embezzlement of more than $2,500 but under $25,000. Both are second degree felonies.
On Monday, Krebs faced potential jurors in the morning and then heard opening statements from a prosecutor with the New Mexico’s Attorney General’s Office, his attorney and testimony from McKamey.
Dozens of supporters sat behind him, many dressed in pastel golf clothing from their morning rounds. A fitting fashion statement since golf is what landed Krebs in this legal trouble.
Prosecutors in August 2019 alleged Krebs used his position as athletic director to move thousands from that budget, funded by state taxpayers, to cover losses from the Scotland golf trip that was designed to be a fundraiser for the Lobo Club, the university’s arm that takes in private donations for Lobo athletics.
There isn’t much question about whether Krebs broke policy at the university, his attorneys are centering the argument to question if he broke the law.
“Let me start by saying Mr. Krebs is charged with embezzlement,” defense attorney Paul Kennedy said. “He is not charged with breaking the rules at UNM.”
This standard was already conceded by the attorney general’s office when it dropped five counts from the indictment that included tampering with evidence, criminal solicitation to commit tampering with evidence, tax fraud, unlawful interest in a public contract, larceny and an additional embezzlement charge.
On June 16, Judge Cindy Leos dismissed four of those charges because evidence was insufficient, “due to an error in the indictment.”
The attorney general’s office said in court filings Krebs may have violated policy and best financial practices at UNM with his conduct, but conceded it could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed a crime.
While that bogey from the attorney general’s office appears to be the premise for Kreb’s defense, the trip to Scotland and how Krebs pushed to make it happen despite clear lack of interest is the way the prosecutor on Monday set it’s argument that Krebs broke the law.
“He indicated to his staff that to bring in more donors to the trip that their golf package would be paid for,” prosecutor Andrew Coffing said in his opening statement. “Three donors accepted the deal, the golf was paid for by the UNM Athletic Department fund. $24,500. This is strictly against the rules.”
To explain the golf trip play, prosecutor John Duran brought McKamey to the witness stand to discuss his role in the fundraiser that was intended to bring in money for Lobo sports that could be a “transformational gift, something that moves the needle,” McKamey said.
Krebs came up with the idea for the trip in 2014. He found a program that would give donors five plays at prestige golf courses in Scotland and lodging in exchange for an $8,000 donation to the Lobo Club. Any potential donors would need to cover their travel expenses.
He enticed donors with NFL Hall of Famer and UNM Lobo Brian Urlacher as a featured celebrity guest. McKamey, a former quarterback for the Lobos, had been had been recently hired by the UNM Foundation to solicit “major gifts” from people to donate at least $25,000 and his first major assignment was to get people to pay and join the golf trip.
Quickly, the fundraiser hit a bunker.
Urlacher backed out of the trip. One person who committed got sick and died. Other potential donors didn’t want to go on the European vacation because it fell on Father’s Day weekend.
Suddenly, McKamey needed to fill three spots in order to meet the requirements for the trip Krebs set up. And the athletic director came up with a plan to cover his losses, McKamey testified.
“He said basically, ‘offer them a discount. They gotta get themselves out there and we’ll take care of the rest,’” McKamey told the jury. “I filled the three spots after that.”
Prosecutors say this action is the reason for the first indictment. By covering the $8,000 plus taxes for three people to play five courses professional golfers usually play on, Krebs covered his responsibility to set up the trip, but then used university money from the athletic budget to pay back the more than $24,000.
Krebs’ lawyers argue that the money came from discretionary funds that are a part of the athletics budget that allow him to spend as he deemed fit. They said he moved the money after he returned from the trip, right before the end of the school’s fiscal year.
McKamey, just weeks into his new job with the UNM Foundation, an entity that fundraises for programs university wide, joined the golf trip with his father-in-law.
He testified that his direct supervisor told him the trip was ill-advised and he shouldn’t go. However, he was encouraged by Krebs to join the Scotland trip.
“It was incredible. It was flawless. Trip of a lifetime,” McKamey testified. “I knew I was happy to be a part of it.” In retrospect to a question he was asked by a prosecutor, he responded it was “not very good.”
Tuesday, defense attorneys for Krebs will have their opportunity to cross-examine McKamey and his statements.
“There was urgency, the trip was coming up soon, (Krebs) needed people, an amount to make even foursomes to play,” McKamey said before court adjourned. “I needed to get the job done.”
The three people McKamey brought in to finish his job and who benefited from Krebs direction’ to waive their fees — Raleigh Gardenhire, Darin Davis and Paul Gibson — are on the witness list and could testify Tuesday.