On November 3, New Mexicans will decide who will be the top law enforcement official in the state for the next four years. Running as a Republican for Attorney General, Sam Kane is a personal injury lawyer who’s been litigating in Las Cruces alongside his wife, who’s also an attorney, for more than two decades. To pay for law school, he worked as a math teacher, taking classes at night. KUNM’s Daniel Montaño asked Kane about his view on flock cameras, consumer protection, and more.
KUNM: What do you see as the most important function of the Attorney General's office, and what would be your top priority if elected?
KANE: So, I think the number one issue that we've got going on here in New Mexico is we've got a crime issue, right? We're number one in property. We're number two in violent crimes, the homicide rate is trending down nationally. Of course, we're at three times the national average. So my main focus, my number one focus, is to get those numbers down, And I think I can do that if I just deal with issues that pertain to New Mexico. We've got district judges that are overwhelmed with a very high caseload. We've got district attorneys that could use some assistance from the attorney general's office. I think I could tackle juvenile delinquencies with a lot of diversion programs — try to try to stop it before it even starts. And so I also think one of the things that is driving up the the statistics here in New Mexico — and I totally get that you've got a lot of native tribes, you've got sovereignty issues, and I certainly don't want to try to in any way flex on some of the tribes — but I think they could use, I'm sure they would welcome, some help in in a lot of areas (where) I think they're somewhat being ignored, and I could go in there and try to make a difference, to see what areas that they would want help on and what areas that they think they have under control. So my first and foremost area that I would come in on is I think I could make a difference in our crime levels.
KUNM: What role do you think the attorney general should play in challenging the federal government when you believe that federal policy conflicts with New Mexico's best interests?
KANE: I would, I think, if the issues directly bear down on New Mexico's safety or even their feeling of safety, right? Whether it's rational or irrational, I think the attorney general can come in, and — you know, we want people to feel safe. We want people to feel safe. We want people to feel secure. We don't want people to feel like they're going to be pulled over without the appropriate levels. And being from Las Cruces, being from the south end of New Mexico, that's a concern that I would definitely tackle, and if need be, we would file a lawsuit against the Trump administration. That is a big concern, and I think it's a big concern of most of the people that I represent: that they don't want to feel like they're being targeted. You know, nobody should have to drive around with a passport because they happen to be of Hispanic origin. I know Mark Wayne Mullin, the new Department of Homeland Security, is making a lot of great inroads, but I think he needs to do a lot more.
KUNM: You mentioned a lot there that you do differently from Attorney General Torrez. What else do you think the Attorney General has gotten wrong in these last few years of his tenure?
KANE: Here's the thing, right? I think the attorney general's office is not an unlimited resource, right? You don't have 500 attorneys working for you, and I think you have to pick and choose where you want to put your time and energy toward, and so my focus, unlike the current attorney general, is I'm going to focus on just things that pertain to New Mexicans, right? I'm not going to get caught up in an issue that is highly partisan, for example. And I'll just give you another example, like the fentanyl issue. It was done under the Biden administration. And again, I'm not trying to point fingers at either party,but Raúl Torres was the Attorney General during that time, right? It was the U.S. Attorney that was appointed under Biden that was making these decisions to release a large number of fentanyl pills into our community, and you're going to tell me that you didn't know anything about that? You kno,w this is your party, right? You are the top law enforcement officer of the state of New Mexico, and all of a sudden this is a surprise to you? And so I think that's where working with some of the federal government agencies real closely would benefit and help the safety of all New Mexicans.
KUNM: One thing that you've talked about as well is flock automated license plate readers. You've called them unconstitutional. What specifically would you do as Attorney General about their use in New Mexico?
KANE: I would try to stop them altogether, right? I'm an Abraham Lincoln Republican,where “let's be consistent across the board.” We believe in, you know, in terms of my personal belief, in self responsibility, right? You don't want a government telling you what to do, when to do it, and how to do it. You don't want a state government or any government being able to look over your shoulder, right? And so I would work really hard to make a recommendation, obviously, that those are unconstitutional. You can't sacrifice your constitutional safeguards for any level of public safety even if there's studies out there, and there are, that they're very effective crime tools. It's just not worth it. People people do not want to feel like they're being watched, they're they're being followed. And so that is an area that I'm pretty pretty strong against, the flock cameras. Thank goodness we don't have any here in Las Cruces — and we don't want to, right?
KUNM: I'm wondering what you think the attorney general's office should be doing to try to protect consumers from powerful corporations and businesses.
KANE: That's what I've been doing for the last 20 years. That's where my heart's at. You've got these huge corporations that come in, and historically they've come into New Mexico — You've got the mining companies that came in and had a significant impact on the environment. When the profits shrunk, they just packed up and left. And they left a lot of people without work. They left environmental disasters looming, and they're still looming. I've said all along, this shouldn't be a Republican or a Democratic issue. New Mexico is the most beautiful state. I tell people I wasn't born here, but I got here as quickly as I could. We want to leave it the way it is, right? We've got some beautiful mountains, we've got some trails, we've got some hiking. So what I would propose, and I think the difference between me and the current attorney general is: I don't want to wait till this is mainstream media news and everybody is screaming about it before you file a lawsuit and you have a you have a news conference, right? I'm going to catch these things at the permitting phase. At the permitting phase, we'll catch them, we'll stop them, and we'll look to see — now, again, I'm limited by statute, right? So, you know, I may not be able to do everything that I want to do, right? Because of my limited scope of what I can and cannot do, but ideally, if I could, I'd catch these folks at the permitting phase, right, and stop them in their tracks before they are even allowed in. And so we'd look to see, and this is also for gas and oil, right? Let's take a look, and I'm not, you know, you got you got to be consistent, right? You can't just go after the data centers and give gas and oil a pass, right? And and vice versa, you can't say the data center’s a pass and then argue that you have an environmental agenda, right? My goal — I'm 51 years old, and I've strived to not be a hypocrite, right? To practice what I preach and to be consistent across the board, and so I think I would want to do this across the board, where you have these data centers that are applying for the permitting phase, and that's where I would come in, right? We're not going to wait till this thing is being built, and then we jump on a public platform and say, “wait a minute, let's stop the future ones from coming in,” right? Which is a good step in the right direction, but it kind of misses the mark.
Support for this coverage comes from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
