“The special prosecutor in this case, Andrea Reeb, is a member of the New Mexico House of Representatives. Under Section 1 of Article III of the New Mexico Constitution, however, a sitting member of the Legislature may not ‘exercise any powers properly belonging’ to either the executive or judicial branch,” the motion begins.
The motion claims that the separation of powers defined in the New Mexico State constitution does not allow for Reeb to continue in her role as special prosecutor — a role to which she was appointed last year by the First Judicial District Attorney in Santa Fe — if she wished to serve as a legislator.
“Doing so vests two core powers of different branches — legislating and prosecuting — in the same person and is thus barred by the plain language of Article III of the New Mexico Constitution,” the motions states, arguing that commingling the two would potentially risk allowing her political positions to influence her actions as a prosecutor.
“Were the arrangement here approved by the courts, future District Attorneys could seek to curry favor with legislators who control their budgets by appointing them to high-profile cases — distorting the legislative process,” the motion continues.
[Hmmm. That *is* a strange arrangement, and I’m not sure I’ve ever seen that before (in my limited experience, of course). Their claim of potential “commingling” of interests seems a stretch, but that doesn’t make this arrangement any less curious. What would the remedy be, though? The case would revert back to the local DA or to the state AG, not get dismissed. — Ed]
Join the conversation as a VIP Member