New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has just unilaterally declared a ban on both concealed and open carry guns in and around Albuquerque. Conservatives erupted, the sheriff said he couldn’t enforce an illegal law like that, citizens showed up at the Roundhouse, New Mexico’s state capitol, carrying openly. Even California lefty congressman Ted Lieu put it to her. I’d say he said it as well as anyone, actually:

No state in the union can suspend the federal constitution. There is no such thing as a state public health emergency exception to the U.S. Constitution.

I never thought I’d agree so much with a California Democrat. But Governor Grisham didn’t seem much to care. “No constitutional right, in my view, including my oath, is intended to be absolute.”

I can’t believe she thought this through before she did it. She doesn’t stand a chance with it, not by the law, not by politics, and especially not if others took “in my view” as literally as she has. That outcome could almost be funny. It wouldn’t be right, but just thinking about it is … deliciously instructive.

In My View, She Was Lying

Obviously the governor’s gun decision was atrocious. Wrong. Stupid. Illegal. Bad as that was, though, her words “in my view” were even worse. Worse because they prove she can’t be trusted, and worse because when people in power start saying that, democracy starts disappearing.

“In my view,” she said, her oath of office wasn’t “absolute.” That means she was fudging when she took it.

New Mexico’s constitution says, “Every person elected or appointed to any office shall, before entering upon his duties take and subscribe to an oath or affirmation that he will support the constitution of the United States and the constitution and laws of this state, and that he will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of his office to the best of his ability.”

She made that oath. Rather, she said the words, but she didn’t mean them. If she didn’t mean them absolutely, then she didn’t mean them at all, not as an oath.

God only knows what wiggle room she had carved out around them in her mind, but that carved-out space was dishonest space. If you say you’re going to support the federal and state constitution, and if you say it as if you really mean it when you don’t, we have a word for that: You’re lying.

Power Plus “In My View” Equals Tyranny

Obviously it also means she thinks she’s the law. She can decide. Based on “my view.” Because she has the power presumably.

It’s bad enough to lie, but a lot worse when you hold the highest position in the state, and you think your lie gives you the right to suspend the law and push your view on everyone. Unconstitutional? Of course. Why do we not allow that in our federal and state constitutions? Because they’re designed to prevent people acting as tyrants. She tried to suspend legal gun rights base on her view and her power. There is no more accurate word for that than tyranny.

The governor is not alone in this, either. The Supreme Court created a new category of legal marriage in the Obergefell decision. They made a pretense at making it look constitutional, but everyone knows they forced it in there, then same-sex marriage on the whole nation. How? They had the power. Why? Because it was their view that it should be that way.

The federal government suspended a lot of rights after the COVID virus landed here. There was no constitutional process, just a power play from people who could get away with doing it based on “their view.

These are just two of many, many instances of people in power deciding what they want, then doing it. Our Constitution is amazingly well designed to prevent that, but they’re in power. They can blow off questions about constitutionality as if they’re not even serious.

Back in New Mexico, people are pushing back already, with law and with politics. That’s the right way to do it, up to and including impeachment.

I could imagine another way. It would be fitting — not right, but fitting. I do not recommend anyone try it, I wouldn’t condone it if it happened, but I’m not worried about that, because I know they won’t. Picture it with me anyway, though because it’s so … instructive.

In Whose View? A Story

Governor Grisham’s limo pulls up to the gate at 1 Mansion Drive, the governor’s mansion. She’s tired, it’s been a rotten day, she’s looking forward to some moments quiet. But she finds the way is blocked — blocked to keep her out.

New Mexico is very much a Democrat state, so it’s hard to imagine who would be the person standing there, but it doesn’t matter for our story. Whoever he is, he won’t budge.

“Let me in!” she demands.

“No, ma’am.”

“You must let! This is my home!”

“No, it isn’t.”

“What do you mean it isn’t?! It’s my home! It’s the governor’s mansion, and I’m the governor!”

“No, ma’am.”

“Did you say, ‘No, ma’am’? Are you insane? I’m the governor, duly elected by the people of this state under the constitution of this state!”

“Not in my view, ma’am.”

“Not in your view?!”

“That’s right, and not in the view of our new governor, who’s moving in to replace you today.”

“Wha — what?! I’m the governor! I was elected! You can’t just have someone take over — ”

“Pardon me, ma’am, but we’re not having this argument. I need you to leave. Now..”

“But no! This is illegal! This is an abuse of power! This is tyranny!”

“Of course it is, ma’am. Everyone knows that.”

“So then, would you —— ”

“No. I’m asking you. Sure, we’re ignoring the state constitution. So, does that make it wrong? No, don’t bother answering, you’ve said it clear enough already. Not in your view.”

 

Tom Gilson (@TomGilsonAuthor) is a senior editor with The Stream and the author or editor of six books, including the recently released Too Good To Be False: How Jesus’ Incomparable Character Reveals His Reality.