Protection of Conscience Project News
Service, not Servitude
Associated Press
SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — The New Mexico state Senate has passed a law that would remove criminal and civil liability for medical professionals who assist in the death of terminally ill patients who have chosen to end their life.
The Elizabeth Whitfield End-of-Life Options Act is named for a former New Mexico judge who testified in support for a right to die for the terminally ill in 2017. She died of cancer the following year. . . . continue reading
The NM Political Report
The bill that would repeal a state statute that criminalizes abortion care in New Mexico is now headed to Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s desk after the House of Representatives passed it on a 40 to 30 vote.
This is a priority bill for Lujan Grisham and she has indicated that she would sign it into law.
The House of Representatives took up SB 10 instead of HB 7, which are mirror bills. SB 10 already passed the state Senate by a vote of 25 to 17 on February 12, and was amended to clarify the bill’s title. Each chamber must pass identical legislation before it can be sent to the governor.
Just as during the Senate floor debate, Republicans in the House attempted to amend the bill and argued for hours over keeping the section of the law that is considered by some healthcare workers as a refusal clause. But the New Mexico Medical Society and other physician groups support the law’s full repeal and the lead sponsor of the House bill, Rep. Micaela Lara Cadena, a Democrat from Mesilla, argued that there are already provisions in place to protect healthcare workers who object to providing care. . . [Full Text]
The NM Political Report
The bill that would repeal a state statute that criminalizes abortion care in New Mexico is now headed to Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s desk after the House of Representatives passed it on a 40 to 30 vote.
This is a priority bill for Lujan Grisham and she has indicated that she would sign it into law.
The House of Representatives took up SB 10 instead of HB 7, which are mirror bills. SB 10 already passed the state Senate by a vote of 25 to 17 on February 12, and was amended to clarify the bill’s title. Each chamber must pass identical legislation before it can be sent to the governor.
Just as during the Senate floor debate, Republicans in the House attempted to amend the bill and argued for hours over keeping the section of the law that is considered by some healthcare workers as a refusal clause. But the New Mexico Medical Society and other physician groups support the law’s full repeal and the lead sponsor of the House bill, Rep. Micaela Lara Cadena, a Democrat from Mesilla, argued that there are already provisions in place to protect healthcare workers who object to providing care. . . [Full text]
Albuquerque Journal
SANTA FE – Discussions about abortion laws in New Mexico have always had moral and religious overtones.
But this year’s debate at the Roundhouse over bills to repeal a long-dormant 1969 state abortion ban has also hinged on a “conscience clause” in the abortion statute that allows health care practitioners to decide not to participate in such procedures.
Critics of the legislation, which passed the Senate last week and could move quickly through the House, say repealing the abortion ban would lead to an exodus of health care workers, especially in rural New Mexico.
But backers claim the argument is a red herring and point to other conscience protections in state and federal law that would remain in place if the abortion law is repealed. . . continue reading
The New Mexico Political Report
Two years after a group of conservative Democrats, along with Republicans voted against decriminalizing abortion care, the state Senate passed SB 10 Thursday, 25 to 17.
SB 10, sponsored by state Sen. Linda Lopez, D-Albuquerque, is called the Respect New Mexico Women and Families Act and has a mirror bill, HB 7, sponsored by Rep. Micaela Lara Cadena, D-Mesilla. The two bills remove three sections from the criminal code which, in 1969, banned abortion with some limited exceptions.
The law has repeatedly been called archaic and advocates for its repeal said it included language contrary to how medicine is currently practiced. . . . [Full text]