On June 29, Franky Gonzales left the Bernalillo County Clerk’s office with tears streaming down his face.  The reserved 52-year-old Albuquerque resident had walked into the office disenfranchised, barred from voting for more than a decade due to past felony convictions, and walked out with his voting rights restored, voiceless no more.

 

Ever since completing the probation that followed his five year prison sentence for armed robbery, he has worked to restore his voting rights under a New Mexico law that reenfranchises ex-offenders who have served their sentences and completed parole or probation. But every time he started the process, he was turned away and told he needed more documentation to prove he was no longer on probation or parole. While some aspects of living with a felony conviction became almost normal for Franky—losing jobs because of his record, getting rejected for housing after a rental office ran a background check—he never got used to not being able to vote. 

 

“For four years they gave me the same run around,” he said. “I called probation and parole. I called Santa Fe. It was frustrating. To some people, voting rights aren’t a big deal, but for me it is huge. It makes you feel like you matter. Without the right to vote you get this less-than feeling.”

 

Franky regained his voting rights, in part, thanks to his involvement in the ACLU of New Mexico’s Smart Justice campaign, part of an ambitious nationwide effort by the ACLU to reform our broken criminal justice system. The Smart Justice Campaign is working to reform unfair and extreme sentencing laws, overhaul an unjust bail system that creates income-based incarceration, challenge prosecutorial abuse, and end the collateral consequences that are imposed on people living with a criminal record. The campaign seeks to center the stories and voices of people like Franky Gonzales, whose lives and families are personally affected by our criminal justice system.

 

Franky got involved with the ACLU’s Smart Justice project because he wants to work toward reforms that address the underlying causes of criminal activities like addiction and mental health issues. Part of Smart Justice’s strategy to eliminate racial disparities in the criminal justice system and reduce the number of people in our jails and prisons involves promoting evidencebased strategies, such as access to drug treatment and mental health services, to reduce crime and make communities safer.

 

Franky is heavily involved with a 12-step program, and spends much of his time spreading messages of hope and recovery to other addicts.

 

“It is cheaper to treat the disease of addiction and behavioral health issues than to incarcerate,” he said. “It would make the community safer, save taxpayers some money, and get people the help they need.”

 

He counts the restoration of his voting rights as an example of what one can achieve with a little patience and perseverance.

 

“It is something I can take back to other addicts who are incarcerated,” he said. “Now, I am getting things restored.”

 

Struggling to restore voting rights or navigate the countless other obstacles created by a felony conviction isn’t unique or uncommon. Franky’s situation is only unique in that his involvement with Smart Justice meant he worked in close contact with ACLU of New Mexico Senior Policy Strategist Paul Haidle, who, as an expert on criminal justice issues, was able to accompany Gonzales to the county clerk’s office to help answer any questions or explain what may have led to the denial of Franky’s voting application.

 

“I’m really happy for Franky and relieved that he can finally vote, but it shouldn’t have taken having a lawyer with him to make this happen,” said Haidle. “For people with a record, registering to vote is too complicated in New Mexico and keeps many people like Franky from having a voice in our political system. Part of Smart Justice’s goal is to tear down the barriers that keep people from moving forward with their lives, such as housing, employment, and restoration of voting rights.”

 

These issues affect a broad swath of New Mexicans. One in three New Mexicans have a criminal record, which translates to approximately 530,000 people who must deal with the 680 collateral consequences that often accompany a criminal record or conviction in the state. While the most common collateral consequences created by a criminal record may be loss of voting rights and difficulty in finding safe housing and gainful employment, a conviction can also make it hard to adopt a child, obtain a professional licensure, attend school and execute an estate.

 

Albuquerque resident Rory Wolf knows all about these obstacles. Since the mid-80’s, Rory has been in and out of prison five times. He believes he has finally found a way forward that will provide him enduring stability — a career path in social work. He chose social work because he believes that with his lived experiences and academic understanding, he could effectively help people to address addiction and other issues that lead to incarceration.

 

However, he may have to reevaluate his current career path after New Mexico Highland’s University officials denied his application for the school’s social work program. Although school officials didn’t give a reason for their denial, Rory believes it had something to do with his criminal record.

 

Rory, who is in his early sixties, said his situation highlights the need for criminal justice reforms that would remove barriers obstructing those working to transition from the custody of the state’s penal system to that of a productive community member. Besides making it easier for people to find jobs and go to school, removing those barriers would be a good first step to making communities safer.

 

“If this would have happened 20 years ago, I would have said (expletive) it and went back to getting high and breaking the law,” he said. “But now I don’t give up. If the door is closed, I will find a way to wiggle it open.”

 

---

 

 

 

"I'm doing better than I’ve ever done throughout the 18 years of my incarceration,” wrote Tremaine from the Roswell Correctional Center. “The freedom is unbelievable. I can literally go outside at 10 p.m. and go pray under the stars if I choose to. Thank you so much.”

 

It was mid-May and Ramadan was just beginning. For weeks prior, Tremaine was consumed with worry that he and his friends would be denied participation in the holy month, a time when Muslims deepen their faith through fasting and communal prayer.

 

But as he prayed beneath the stars, his fear turned to relief.

 

Tremaine had reached out to the ACLU of New Mexico on a number of occasions concerning the barriers he faced in practicing his faith while incarcerated, and encouraged many of his friends experiencing similar barriers to do the same.  In response, ACLU-NM Legal Director Leon Howard sent a letter to wardens at state prisons in advance of Ramadan to remind them that inmates have a constitutional right to exercise their religious beliefs while incarcerated.

 

That letter appeared to have sparked change at the Roswell correctional Center.

 

It was a stark contrast from Tremaine’s last Ramadan, when he was still at Lea County Correctional Facility (LCCF) in Hobbs. He spent much of the month pleading with prison staff to allow him and his fellow Muslim inmates to pray together and to eat proper halal meals at the appropriate times. But most of his pleas fell on deaf ears. The warden didn’t even allow them to participate in Eid-Al-Fitr, the festival that marks the close of Ramadan and the end of fasting.

 

What should have been a time of peace and an opportunity to deepen his devotion and faith, was instead a time of frustration and despair. But Tremaine never gave up hope that his next Ramadan would be better. And he never stopped fighting to exercise his constitutional right to practice Islam — the faith he says saved his life.

 

“I came from a really dark place and after realizing how dark that place truly was, I never wanted to go back. So I turned on the lights,” said Tremaine when I visited him last summer at LCCF.

 

At a young age, having little direction and guidance from the adults in his life, Tremaine joined an LA street gang, chasing wealth and power down an ever more dangerous path that eventually landed him behind bars at just twenty-one. But when he found Islam, he found peace. 

 

It’s because of his faith that he maintains hope for the future, even after enduring nearly two decades of incarceration.

 

When I last spoke to Tremaine on the phone in May, I could hear that hope in his voice. He was convinced Leon’s letter spurred the prison administration to finally approve his proposal for Muslims’ observance of Ramadan, which allowed them to exercise their right to fast, pray, and follow a religious diet.

 

Here at the ACLU, we were overjoyed to hear the news. We know that when inmates are allowed to practice their faith, it can improve rehabilitation outcomes, and can even lower chances of reoffending. 

 

We also know, as Leon so eloquently put it, “Religious accommodations are more than rights afforded to inmates by the First Amendment– for some, faith is the sole source of hope in a grim environment where the prospects for a better life are, at times, remote.”

 

When Tremaine goes to sleep at night, he gazes up at magazine cutouts of snow-capped Colorado mountains taped to the top of his bunkbed. He dreams of Mount Rushmore and touching an iPhone – technology that didn’t exist when he was locked up. More than anything, he dreams of becoming a motivational speaker for troubled youth to prevent young people from following in his footsteps.

 

In just a few years, Tremaine will be leaving prison and I, for one, am glad that when he’s out, he won’t be a member of a gang, but a member of a religious community that will support his continued rehabilitation.

 

“Change is hard,” says Tremaine. “I’m still changing every day, but I’m more grounded with Islam. I know I’ll be fine on the other side because it’s helped me to get through all these years.”

 

---

 

 

On June 4, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a baker that refused to sell a wedding cake to a samesex couple, reversing a lower court’s decision in favor of the couple. Although the Supreme Court based its decision on concerns unique to the facts of the case, and reaffirmed the core principle that businesses open to the public should not be permitted to discriminate against customers because of who they are, the decision has, understandably, caused alarm in our communities. We sat down with ACLU of New Mexico reproductive freedom attorney Erin Armstrong to set the record straight on what the Supreme Court’s decision means.

 

---

 

 

ERIN ARMSTRONG: ACLU clients Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig went to Masterpiece Caksehop in Denver to purchase a cake for their wedding celebration.  But when they got there, the bakery refused to sell them a wedding cake because they are a same-sex couple. The Christian owned bakery claimed that the Constitution’s protections of free speech and freedom of religion gave it the right to override the state’s civil rights laws.  Dave and Charlie decided to file a formal complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which adjudicates complaints under Colorado anti-discrimination law, and the Commission found in the couple’s favor. The bakery appealed and eventually the case went all the way up to the Supreme Court.

 

 

EA: Unfortunately, the Supreme Court overturned the lower court’s decision because, after examining the record, the justices in the majority felt that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission displayed signs of religious bias and hostility towards the bakery. Because of that, the Court found that the bakery didn’t get a neutral or fair process. The Court’s decision is a loss for Charlie and Dave, but this narrow ruling applies only to this specific case. The Supreme Court did not strike down anti-discrimination laws. And in fact, the Court affirmed the importance of such laws and acknowledged the serious harms that result when businesses discriminate against people because of their sexual orientation. While we’re disappointed about the outcome for this couple, we’re also focused on making sure that people don’t misunderstand the decision to be an endorsement of discrimination.

 

 

EA: No, and in fact, in New Mexico we have very strong public accommodation and anti-discrimination law that clearly prohibits businesses that serve the public from discriminating against people based on sexual orientation or other protected statuses. Take the New Mexico Supreme Court’s ruling in Elane Photography, for instance. In that case, a same-sex couple was seeking to obtain the services of a photography business for their commitment ceremony.  But the business refused to provide those services, claiming that doing so would violate its Christian beliefs. Our New Mexico Supreme Court held very clearly that turning them away was unlawful discrimination and not permissible. That ruling was unaffected by the Supreme Court’s decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop and is still very much intact.  

 

 

EA: Masterpiece Cakeshop is not and has never been about the cake.  It’s about the harm that comes from being turned away from a business because of who you are. It’s about the fear and stigma that prevent people from being fully welcomed into public life. LGBTQ people buying a wedding cake shouldn’t have to go to another bakery, just like women looking to fill a prescription for birth control shouldn’t have to go to another pharmacy when they are turned away because of someone else’s religious objections. Those experiences are dehumanizing and can be life-altering. When someone has been discriminated against and denied services once, every time they enter a storefront from that day forward, they are more likely to worry they’ll be judged, silenced, and treated unfairly. That comes at a cost. 

 

 

EA: In the aftermath of Masterpiece Cakeshop, we are focused on educating our communities about what New Mexico law still requires and has required for a long time: if you are a business that is open to the public, you must be open to all. The ACLU is actively working with community partners to dispel misinformation and educate people about their rights through listening sessions, news articles, and social media. We hope people will connect with us and let us know if they or someone they know or love has been impacted by similar instances of discrimination.