Lawsuit challenges legality of governor's line-item vetoes on special session bill

SANTA FE — A former state Cabinet secretary and possible GOP gubernatorial candidate has filed a petition challenging the legality of Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s line-item vetoes — or partial vetoes — of a special session funding bill.

Specifically, the lawsuit filed by Duke Rodriguez argues the governor distorted legislative intent by striking out timelines and other guardrails from the $161 million spending measure.

Former state senator Jacob Candelaria, who is Rodriguez’s attorney in the case, said Friday the vetoes were an overreach of the governor’s authority.

He also said Rodriguez decided to file the petition in the absence of any formal pushback from the Democratic-controlled Legislature.

“Frankly, ordinary New Mexicans like my client cannot rely on Democratic elites to hold a governor from their own party accountable,” said Candelaria, who clashed with the Governor’s Office and top-ranking legislative Democrats during his nearly 10-year tenure in the Senate.

However, a Lujan Grisham spokesman said Friday it was “preposterous” for Rodriguez to claim to have knowledge about the legislative intent behind the appropriations bill.

Lujan Grisham spokesman Michael Coleman also cited the bipartisan support at the Roundhouse for the spending measure, which appropriated state funds for food assistance programs, food banks and public television and radio stations, among other initiatives.

“With this lawsuit, Mr. Rodriguez is advocating to take food off the tables of New Mexican families that need it most,” Coleman said in a statement.

Rodriguez is the president and CEO of Ultra Health, New Mexico’s largest medical cannabis corporation, and previously led the state Human Services Department under former Gov. Gary Johnson. Rodriguez said in May he was weighing a bid for governor next year but has not made an official announcement.

When asked about Rodriguez’s motivations in filing the Supreme Court petition, Candelaria acknowledged his client’s possible candidacy but said that has no bearing on the underlying legal arguments.

“Any lawsuit of this nature, even if it’s brought by the pope, could be accused of being political,” Candelaria told the Journal.

Meanwhile, there have been previous New Mexico Supreme Court cases dealing with the scope of the governor’s line-item veto authority, which can typically only be exercised in bills dealing with how state funds are spent.

Most recently, Democratic lawmakers in 2017 challenged then-Gov. Susana Martinez’s vetoes of all funding for legislative agencies, colleges and universities. The Legislature also successfully challenged a 2011 attempt by Martinez to change a dollar amount in that year’s budget bill.

Prior to that, the state Supreme Court upheld a number of line-item vetoes by Republican Gov. Garrey Carruthers in 1988 after Democratic lawmakers Max Coll of Santa Fe and Ben Altamirano of Silver City filed a challenge.

However, Candelaria said the current petition differs from those past cases since it deals specifically with spending guardrails axed by Lujan Grisham.

The bill in question, House Bill 1, was one of five bills approved during the two-day special session called this month by Lujan Grisham to address the state-level impact of a sweeping federal budget bill.

Before signing the bill, the governor struck down several provisions requiring appropriated funds to be spent by June 2027. She also vetoed language stipulating that any money still unspent by that time revert to the state general fund.

While the governor has the authority to line-item veto certain spending provisions, Candelaria said the vetoes in question illegally changed lawmakers’ plan for spending the approved funds.

“The governor is not the branch of government that gets to simply write new laws because she thinks she knows better than anyone else,” said Candelaria.

It’s not yet clear whether the Supreme Court will hold oral arguments in the case, as no orders had been issued as of late Friday.