A Vote of No Confidence: NM's Silence on the Hemani Ruling

Disclaimer: This article is for informational and editorial purposes only and is not legal advice. It reflects the opinions and questions of New Mexico Madness based on public records. Firearms and cannabis laws vary by state and change frequently. Always verify current law and consult a qualified attorney. New Mexico Madness is not an authority on Second Amendment rights or any other legal matter.

Where Things Stand

On Monday, we publicly asked Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and the New Mexico Department of Justice five plain questions about what United States v. Hemani means for New Mexicans. The post drew real attention. The state offered no response. The clock kept running, and the silence hardened into a position of its own.

So let's address the argument their staff is almost certainly making behind closed doors: Why do anything at all?

The "Do Nothing" Defense—Stated Fairly

There is a legitimate case for inaction, and we'll give it its due. Section 922(g)(3) is federal law. Hemani is a federal ruling. ATF Form 4473 and the guidance behind it are federal instruments. A state has no strict obligation to interpret federal firearms policy for its residents, and there's a reasonable argument to wait until the ATF formally updates its forms before getting ahead of a decision the Court itself called narrow.

That's the strongest version of their position. Now here's why it doesn't hold up.

The Cost of Doing Nothing

Silence is not neutral. It's a decision, and it has consequences that compound by the day.

Citizens stay trapped. Until the ATF updates Form 4473, every New Mexico cannabis user buying a firearm still faces the same self-incrimination dilemma. State silence means zero guidance on a question that can still carry federal exposure.
Law enforcement improvises. Officers and prosecutors handling cases that once hinged on cannabis use now have no state direction—inviting inconsistent, county-by-county enforcement in a state already ranked worst in the nation for crime.
Retailers carry the risk. New Mexico gun dealers are caught between a ruling that narrowed the ban and a federal form that still asks the question, guessing about their license exposure with no state clarity.
The vacuum gets litigated. Without guidance, the gap fills with lawsuits instead of policy—a pattern New Mexico knows well.
Someone else writes the story. When the state says nothing, the interpretation gets authored by advocacy groups, gun shops, and the press. The vacuum never stays empty.

A wound left untreated doesn't stop bleeding because no one looks at it.

It's Not Just Possession—It's Your Permit and Your Reciprocity

Here's the layer most coverage has missed entirely. This ruling reaches well beyond whether you can keep a gun at home.

New Mexico's concealed carry licensing carries its own substance-related disqualifiers, and federal law has long treated cannabis use as a disqualifier for a permit. That puts the license status of cannabis-using New Mexicans in a genuine gray zone after Hemani. And because New Mexico honors concealed carry reciprocity with roughly two dozen states, that uncertainty doesn't stop at the state line—a New Mexico permit holder carrying lawfully in Texas or Arizona is relying on a credential whose federal footing the state refuses to clarify. The silence travels.

She's Done It in 48 Hours Before

The "we have to wait" defense collapses against the Governor's own record.

In September 2023, when she wanted to act on guns, she moved in roughly a day. She declared gun violence a public health emergency and issued an order suspending open and concealed carry across Bernalillo County—effective immediately, renewable indefinitely, and including a directive for monthly state inspections of firearm dealers. In March 2025, the New Mexico Supreme Court upheld her authority to treat gun violence as a public health emergency.

So the machinery exists. The speed exists. The court-tested authority to issue rapid, dealer-facing firearm directives exists. The state has simply chosen not to use any of it here. The speed was never the problem. The will is.

How Easy This Would Be

We're not lawyers, and this is not a legal document—it's an illustration of how little effort clarity would actually require. Using powers the state has already used, temporary guidance could say, in plain terms:

New Mexico will not pursue state charges based solely on lawful cannabis use following the Hemani ruling.
Interim guidance for New Mexico firearm retailers on handling the unsettled Form 4473 question, pending federal updates.
Direction to state and local law enforcement on cases previously resting on cannabis use alone.
A clear public notice for concealed carry licensees on how the ruling affects their permits and reciprocity.
A stated commitment to update residents the moment the ATF revises federal guidance.

Five lines. That's the distance between leadership and silence.

Following the Alignment

This raises a fair question: why would leaders who move fast to restrict guns go quiet when a ruling expands one? Public records offer a clue.

Both the Governor and the Attorney General have been endorsed by national gun-control organizations, including Everytown for Gun Safety. Giffords has been deeply active in New Mexico for years—from launching state coalitions to celebrating the state's red-flag law—and its political arm remains engaged in the current gubernatorial cycle. These are documented endorsements, not speculation. And they raise a legitimate question about whether the priorities of the movement that helped elect these officials are reflected in their silence on a ruling that broadened a constitutional right.

We're not alleging anything illegal. Accepting an endorsement is lawful and routine. We're asking whether it explains the quiet.

Questions for the Record

In the same spirit as Monday's memo, we put the following to Governor Lujan Grisham and Attorney General Torrez, on behalf of New Mexicans:

Will the state issue interim guidance for citizens, retailers, and law enforcement following Hemani—and if not, why not?
In 2023 the state acted on firearms within roughly 48 hours under emergency authority. Why is that urgency absent now?
How does the ruling affect the concealed carry licenses and reciprocity rights of cannabis-using New Mexicans?
Both offices have accepted endorsements from national gun-control organizations. We're not asking whether that's legal—it is. We're asking whether it explains the silence.
When a Supreme Court ruling expands a right, are New Mexicans seeing leadership guided by their interests—or by the priorities of the groups that backed these campaigns?

Madness Thoughts: A Vote of No Confidence

We'll say it as gun owners and as New Mexicans: this is no longer about cannabis. It's about whether the people who govern us will show up when a decision this consequential affects this many of us.

They can move a state in 48 hours when the cause suits them. They can declare emergencies, inspect dealers, and suspend carry rights with a signature. But on a unanimous ruling that expands the rights of their own citizens, they've gone silent—and the company they keep offers a reason why. That's not caution. That's a choice. And in a state ranked worst in the nation for crime, a leadership that acts only in one direction has earned exactly what this headline says: a vote of no confidence. The calendar is not on their side, and New Mexicans have long memories. We'll keep asking. That's the job.