A lawsuit alleging an illegal conspiracy to defeat three incumbent lawmakers in the June primary was tossed out by a district judge on Thursday because the lawmakers failed to state a proper claim and have no basis to sue many of the defendants named in the suit.
The Center for Civic Policy (CCP), one of the groups named in the lawsuit, hailed the dismissal as vindication of its claim that the lawsuit was frivolous.
“We are pleased with today’s news and we certainly feel vindicated,” Matt Brix, policy director for the group, said in a statement released Thursday evening. “This lawsuit was nothing more than an attempt to muzzle nonprofit organizations from educating the public about how their legislators vote. We look forward to continuing our work, including educating the public about how elected officials vote and from whom they receive contributions.”
In dismissing the lawsuit filed by outgoing Sens. Shannon Robinson and James Taylor and Rep. Dan Silva, Judge Linda Vanzi wrote that, under state law, candidates who contest elections can sue their opponents but not third-party groups. The lawmakers named their opponents, along with CCP and other groups, in their lawsuit.
In addition, the judge wrote, the lawmakers alleged that the conspiracy against them involved violations of criminal statutes and the IRS code, but neither is enforceable in civil court. Because of that, Vanzi wrote, “absent any allegation from contestants that the votes were miscounted or uncounted, that voters cast their votes illegally or that election officials committed fraud, contestants have not asserted a claim… for which relief can be granted.”
To top it off, the lawsuit improperly named some defendants as officers in organizations in which they are not officers, and even named as a defendant one organization that no longer exists. Read the judge’s dismissal by clicking here.
In June, Eric Griego defeated
Some of the groups named in the lawsuit endorsed the defeated lawmakers’ challengers in the primary. Others, including CCP, engaged in what they call a “Legislative Accountability Project” that used mailers, radio ads and phone calls to highlight lawmakers’ voting records two to three months before the primary.
The groups say the accountability project was related to a coming special session of the Legislature, not the election. The attorney general and secretary of state disagreed, and have tried to force CCP and a second group involved in the situation, SouthWest Organizing Project (SWOP), to register as political committees and comply with the state’s campaign reporting act.
The attorney general and attorneys for the groups have agreed to a stay on any action by the secretary of state so the case can instead be resolved through legal action.
At stake is what nonprofits can and can’t do when spreading information about elected officials, and the question is whether the mailers crossed the line between issue advocacy and political campaigning.
If I get comment from the lawmakers on Vanzi’s action, you’ll read it here.
Update, 8 a.m.
Silva and
Meanwhile, Conservation Voters of New Mexico, another nonprofit named in the lawsuit, put out a news release applauding the judge’s decision.
“We are pleased and redeemed that the judge has dismissed this baseless complaint,” said Sandy Buffett, the group’s executive director. “These legislators lost their seats because the voters spoke and voted against entrenched and out-of-touch incumbents who had consistently sided with the polluters and industry special interests over the protection of clean air, clean water and public health.”
By way of disclosure, I also write for the New Mexico Independent, which is owned by the Center for Independent Media in