ACLU-NM lawsuit pushes PED to remove ban against “disparaging” standardized tests
 
SANTA FE, NM—In response to a free speech lawsuit filed in March by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of New Mexico, the New Mexico Public Education Department (PED) announced that it will begin the process of removing the rule that prohibits PED employees from “disparaging” standardized tests. The PED will ask the court for a stay in the lawsuit while it goes through the necessary steps to remove the gag rule from the books.

“We are extremely pleased that the Public Education Department has chosen to do the right thing and strike this unconstitutional gag rule from the books,” said ACLU-NM Staff Attorney María Mártinez Sánchez. “Many NM educators have serious and legitimate concerns about overreliance on standardized testing, and the harms it can cause to individual students and the educational process as a whole. We should be listening to the teachers’ expertise on these issues, not trying to stifle their free speech by threatening their jobs.”

The ACLU of New Mexico filed the lawsuit on behalf of four Albuquerque elementary school teachers, a special education teacher in Santa Fe, and an Albuquerque parent who currently has a child in the public school system. The suit alleged that the gag rule violates New Mexico constitutional free speech protections. The non-disparagement regulation states that teachers and other employees are prohibited from “disparag[ing] or diminish[ing] the significance, importance, or use of standardized tests,” on pain of “suspension or revocation of a person’s educator or administrator licensure or other PED licensure…” The lawsuit brought multiple state constitutional claims against PED including viewpoint discrimination, denial of due process of law, and violation of New Mexico public school students’ fundamental right to education.

“This end to the testing gag rule is a weight off our shoulders,” said plaintiff Mary Mackie, a teacher at Montezuma Elementary School in Albuquerque, NM. “Educators need to be able to have open and honest conversations about standardized tests, not just in the public sphere, but also in talking with parents about what’s best for their children. I’ve seen situations where standardized testing can actually be harmful to the education and well-being of certain students, and parents have a right to hear that from their child’s teacher.”

ACLU-NM Legal Director Alexandra Freedman Smith, ACLU-NM Staff Attorney Maria Sanchez, and ACLU-NM Cooperating Attorneys Laura Schauer Ives, Katherine Wray, and Jane Katherine Girard represent the plaintiffs in this case.

###

Tamesha Means

 

Tamesha Means was 18 weeks pregnant with her third child when her water broke. She rushedto the nearest hospital, which is operated by Mercy Health Partners in Muskegon, Michigan. The pregnancy was not viable. Ending the pregnancy would have been the safest course of action, but the hospital’s religious policies forbade it—so they gave Tamesha two Tylenol and sent her home without telling her that there was virtually no way she could give birth to a healthy baby. When Tamesha returned the next morning, she was bleeding, in severe pain, and showing signs of an infection; again, she was turned away. Even after she returned a third time, in excruciating pain, the hospital staff began filling out the discharge paperwork. It was only when Tamesha began to deliver that the hospital provided care. The baby died within hours.

Tamesha is not alone. Today, the ACLU, in partnership with Merger Watch, released a report called Health Care Denied, which documents numerous instances throughout the country in which Catholic hospitals put women’s health at risk by denying them reproductive health care. One in six hospital beds in the United States is in a facility that complies with Catholic directives that prohibit a range of reproductive health care services, even when a woman’s life or health is in jeopardy. In some states, more than 40 percent of all hospital beds are in a Catholic-run facility.

The consequences are alarming. Despite receiving billions in taxpayer dollars, these hospitals are prohibited from providing basic health care services like contraception, sterilization, many infertility treatments, and abortion, even when a woman’s life or health is put at risk by the continued pregnancy. Transgender and gender-non-conforming patients suffer the same and other, similar harms when seeking reproductive healthcare. Many patients do not even learn about these prohibitions until they find themselves in the midst of a health crisis. For millions of Americans, going to a hospital that is not governed by Catholic directives isn’t even an option. In many communities, there simply are no other alternatives.

The ACLU of New Mexico has long been a vocal advocate against Catholic and Catholic-affiliated hospitals putting the health and safety of patients at risk with their religious directives. In 2008, the ACLU of New Mexico, in partnership with other concerned community organizations, launched the “Get It in Writing” campaign when it was announced that St. Vincent Hospital in Santa Fe would partner with CHRISTUS Heath, a Dallas-based Catholic health corporation. Our campaign demanded that St. Vincent declare up front and in writing how it would protect family planning services and end-of-life choices for patients in the merger. Tellingly, CHRISTUS-St. Vincent ultimately refused to offer the community written assurances that they would not put their religious beliefs over the health or wishes of their patients.

Many communities in New Mexico are currently reliant on Catholic and other religiously-affiliated hospitals for their health care. We remain vigilant in our efforts to ensure that when it comes to the provision of health care in hospitals, medical standards and patient needs – not religion – are the guide.  We cannot permit hospitals to use their religious identity to discriminate against, and harm, patients. If this has happened to you we want to hear about it. Were you or a loved one turned away and denied necessary healthcare by a Catholic or religiously-affiliated hospital in New Mexico? You can report it to the ACLU of New Mexico through our online legal complaint form on our website.

ALBUQUERQUE, NM—Yesterday, the New Mexico State Court of Appeals upheld a district court opinion in a case brought by the ACLU which found that former Secretary of State Dianna Duran had violated state IPRA law by withholding public information. In 2011, Duran made allegations before the legislature that foreign nationals had committed voter fraud by voting in New Mexico elections. Due to the serious nature of her claims and their potential to undermine the public’s confidence in New Mexico’s elections, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of New Mexico filed a public records request for the documentation she claimed supported her allegations. After Duran steadfastly refused to provide the evidence, the ACLU of New Mexico filed a public records lawsuit in 2011. In 2014, a district court judge ordered the state to pay nearly $87,000 in attorney’s fees and costs based on its earlier finding in 2012 that Duran had violated state IPRA law. The district court's decision awarding fees and costs against former Secretary Duran was affirmed yesterday by the New Mexico Court of Appeals.

The following can be attributed to ACLU of New Mexico Legal Director Alexandra Freedman Smith:

“Today’s ruling is a victory for government transparency and accountability in our state. Rather than making the embarrassing admission that her claims were largely unsupported, Duran spent years attempting to hide information from the public and it has cost taxpayers dearly. We hope this ruling stands as a reminder to the state and other local governments that violating public records law has consequences.”

###