Category: Newsletters

By Bud Shaver,

​ALBUQUERQUE, NM — Abortion Free New Mexico is calling for an immediate review and halt of abortion pill distribution practices operating in violation of federal requirements, including those associated with The Satanic Temple in New Mexico, following a federal appeals court ruling that reinstates in-person dispensing requirements for abortion drugs.
​
​The ruling—stemming from a Louisiana-led legal challenge—targets the FDA’s expanded policies that allowed abortion drugs like mifepristone to be prescribed via telehealth and distributed through the mail. The court’s decision restores requirements that these drugs be dispensed in person under medical oversight, directly challenging mail-order abortion models operating nationwide.

🔻 WHAT JUST HAPPENED

• Federal appeals court (5th Circuit) ruling
• Requires abortion pill (mifepristone) to be dispensed IN PERSON
• Blocks distribution by MAIL and TELEHEALTH
• Reinstates prior FDA safeguards
• Case expected to continue through appeals, potentially reaching the U.S. Supreme Court

KEY IMPACT: Mail-order abortion pill distribution is now under direct legal challenge nationwideThe ruling places mail-order abortion pill distribution under direct legal challenge nationwide and creates a clear conflict between federal drug requirements and abortion pill distribution models currently operating in New Mexico.

Operation Rescue emphasized that the ruling could restrict mail-order abortion pill distribution and challenge telehealth models currently operating in states like New Mexico.

🔻 DOCUMENTED MODEL IN NEW MEXICO

Public reporting and organizational materials show that The Satanic Temple’s abortion model includes:

• Remote (telehealth) consultations
• Distribution of abortion pills by mail
• Framing abortion as a “religious abortion ritual”
• No in-person dispensing prior to access

​THIS MODEL IS DIRECTLY IMPACTED by reinstated federal requirements.
​Public reporting and organizational materials indicate that The Satanic Temple has promoted an abortion access model in New Mexico that includes remote telehealth consultations, distribution of abortion pills by mail, and framing the procedure as a “religious abortion ritual,” without in-person dispensing prior to access. These elements are now directly impacted by reinstated federal safeguards.

🔻 THE LEGAL CONFLICT

The ruling creates a direct conflict between federal drug requirements and abortion pill distribution models currently operating in New Mexico.​

Because the case addresses federal regulation—not just state law, it raises immediate questions about whether ongoing practices are in compliance—or in defiance—of federal safeguards.

​🔻Tara Shaver, Spokeswoman for Abortion Free New Mexico issued the following statement,

​“If anyone thinks they can rebrand abortion as a ‘ritual’ to bypass federal safeguards and endanger women, they’re wrong. The Satanic Temple doesn’t get a pass. The rules don’t change based on how you frame it.”

“You don’t get to call it a ‘ritual’ and operate outside federal law. NO EXCEPTIONS. NO EXCUSES.”

Abortion Free New Mexico emphasized that the ruling raises immediate questions about whether abortion pill distribution practices currently operating in New Mexico are in compliance—or in defiance—of federal requirements.Abortion Free New Mexico is calling on state regulators and medical oversight bodies to take immediate action.

“State officials must determine whether these operations are in compliance—or operating in defiance of federal requirements,” Shaver said.
​
“If they are not in compliance, they should be halted immediately. ​

🔻 WHAT THIS MEANS FOR NEW MEXICO

• Telehealth-based abortion pill distribution models are now under legal scrutiny
• Federal requirements may conflict with current state-level practices
• Enforcement decisions will determine whether these operations continue

New Mexico has seen a rapid expansion of abortion access in recent years, including the use of telehealth-based abortion pill distribution models, while concerns about oversight and reporting gaps remain. This ruling places the state at the center of a broader national conflict over federal authority, state policy, and enforcement of medical standards.​

Appeals in the case are ongoing and may ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, meaning legal and regulatory conditions could shift quickly in the coming months. In the meantime, providers may be required to alter or cease operations depending on enforcement guidance.

“This can’t continue. Enough is enough,” Shaver concluded.
​
“If Satanic Temple ritual abortions violate federal requirements, they must be halted. No exceptions. No excuses.”

By Bud Shaver,

​ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — New Mexico has officially eliminated its longstanding abortion reporting requirement after Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed Senate Bill 30 into law during the 2026 legislative session—removing the state’s only statutory mechanism for collecting aggregate abortion data, without establishing any replacement system–effectively ending the state’s formal abortion data reporting structure.

The repealed law required abortion providers to submit anonymous, statistical reports within five days of a procedure. These reports did not include patient-identifying information, but provided basic public health data used to track trends across the state.​

With the repeal now in effect, New Mexico no longer maintains a formal statewide abortion reporting requirement.

WHAT CHANGED

• Senate Bill 30 repealed New Mexico’s abortion reporting statute
• The previous law required non-identifying, statistical data submission
• The bill was signed into law by the governor in 2026
• No replacement reporting framework was included in the legislation
• Lawmakers acknowledged the reporting requirement had not been enforced in recent years

WHY IT MATTERS

The removal of the reporting requirement raises broader questions about how abortion-related data will be tracked moving forward.

Without a reporting system, there is no standardized mechanism to evaluate:

• Total number of procedures performed statewide
• General gestational trends
• Public health patterns over time

​This change comes as New Mexico continues to see significant shifts in its abortion landscape.

CURRENT NEW MEXICO ABORTION LANDSCAPE 

To understand the implications of ending statewide abortion reporting, it is necessary to examine the current landscape of abortion facilities operating in New Mexico.

• 14 abortion facilities statewide, including 2 taxpayer-funded projects under development in northern and southern New Mexico
• 7 located in Albuquerque alone
• Continued expansion following the overturning of Roe v. Wade
• Ongoing development of publicly funded abortion-related infrastructure

​Abortion Free New Mexico has documented this growth as part of broader changes positioning the state as a regional hub for abortion access.

“New Mexico is not just seeing expansion—it is actively supporting it through taxpayer-funded projects in both northern and southern parts of the state,” said Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico.

“When government-backed expansion is happening alongside the removal of reporting, it raises serious questions about transparency and accountability.”

OVERSIGHT AND DATA GAPS

Abortion Free New Mexico has also documentedover 50 abortion-related injuries in New Mexico, including one documented death, based on publicly available records and reporting compiled by the organization.

With the repeal of the state’s reporting requirement—and no replacement system in place—there is now no standardized, statewide mechanism for collecting or publishing aggregate abortion data in New Mexico. 

Without that framework, there is no consistent way to track:

• The total number of procedures performed across the state
• Broad gestational trends
• Patterns related to complications or adverse events
• Year-over-year changes in volume or outcomes

While individual incidents may still surface through other channels, there is no centralized system ensuring that information is consistently collected, analyzed, and made available for public review.​
Without that structure, it becomes unclear how trends, complications, and overall impact will be evaluated over time.

WHAT “NO REPORTING” MEANS (AT-A-GLANCE)

• No uniform statewide abortion data collection
• No consistent public reporting of aggregate trends
• No centralized tracking of complications or outcomes

ENFORCEMENT AND OVERSIGHT CONCERNS 

The repeal of New Mexico’s abortion reporting requirement does not resolve a past enforcement gap—it formalizes the absence of a structured statewide oversight system.

In addition to the lack of reporting, abortion facilities in New Mexico are not regulated as ambulatory surgical centers, despite performing procedures that, in other healthcare contexts, are subject to oversight, inspection, and standardized reporting requirements.

Abortion is frequently described by proponents as healthcare. However, unlike other areas of medicine—where increased activity brings increased transparency, oversight, and data collection—New Mexico has moved in the opposite direction by removing its only reporting requirement without replacement.

“At its core, abortion ends human life—yet it is treated as an exception and remains one of the least transparent areas of healthcare when it comes to reporting, oversight, and accountability,” said Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico.

“In any other area of medicine, that would be unacceptable—and that contradiction is impossible to ignore.”

This contrast raises fundamental questions about how healthcare is defined, how oversight is applied, and why transparency is reduced in this area while maintained elsewhere.

Without consistent reporting, classification, and oversight standards, evaluating outcomes and ensuring transparency becomes significantly more difficult.

STATEMENT FROM ABORTION FREE NEW MEXICO

“In any other area of healthcare or public policy, increasing activity is usually met with more reporting—not less. Why is this situation different?” said Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico.

“If the number of procedures is increasing, shouldn’t there be more clarity—not less—about what’s happening at a statewide level? This wasn’t about private medical records—it was anonymous, statistical data. So why eliminate even that level of visibility?”

“What replaces the role that reporting once played in helping the public understand trends, scale, and impact? You can’t have informed public policy without public data. Removing reporting doesn’t answer questions—it creates them.”

A CALL FOR PUBLIC AWARENESS AND REVIEW

Abortion Free New Mexico is encouraging the public, media, and policymakers to review the implications of this change and consider how data transparency plays a role in shaping informed public policy.

​ABOUT ABORTION FREE NEW MEXICO

Abortion Free New Mexico is committed to research, documentation, and public awareness regarding abortion policy and its impact across the state. The organization also operates a compassionate outreach team, providing real-time support to women in crisis through its Life Fund, which offers tangible assistance such as transportation, housing support, and baby essentials.

By Bud Shaver,

Albuquerque, NM – Abortion Free New Mexico (AFNM) is raising concerns following the re–opening of a Planned Parenthood facility in Northeast Albuquerque, which is now providing in-person medical abortions at 9809 Candelaria Rd NE.

According to Planned Parenthood’s website, the location—listed as the “Northeast Heights Health Center of Albuquerque, NM”—is currently open and actively providing services.

AFNM says the re-opening reflects a broader trend of abortion expansion in New Mexico following the overturning of Roe v. Wade, driven in part by increasing out-of-state demand and policies that have positioned the state as a regional destination for abortion. The organization also points to the role of state leadership, citing taxpayer-funded initiatives and public investments that it says are accelerating the growth of abortion infrastructure.

Rapid Expansion Since Roe v. Wade Overturn

In 2022, when Roe v. Wade was overturned:

• Albuquerque had 4 abortion facilities
• The state had approximately 9 total

Today:

• Albuquerque now has 7 abortion facilities
• New Mexico has 14 free-standing abortion facilities statewide 
• Additional mail-order abortion pill services are offered remotely through The Satanic Temple.

AFNM notes that:

• A taxpayer-funded abortion facility is already under construction in Las Cruces, supported by approximately $10 million in state funding approved by the New Mexico Legislature and backed by Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham. State leaders have also advanced plans for a second publicly funded facility in Northern New Mexico — with an additional $10 million requested and Farmington identified among the potential locations — though final approval and construction details remain limited.

Tara Shaver, spokeswoman for Abortion Free New Mexico issued the following statement:

“Since Roe v. Wade was overturned, New Mexico has rapidly positioned itself as a regional destination for abortion, with out-of-state demand driving significant growth in abortion access across our state,” Shaver said.

“This isn’t happening in a vacuum — it is being actively shaped and accelerated by state leadership. While other states are strengthening protections for life, New Mexico’s leaders are spearheading a dramatic expansion of abortion infrastructure, including the use of taxpayer dollars.”

“We are witnessing the normalization of abortion expansion in New Mexico, with policy decisions and public funding working together to turn our state into a hub for abortion access in the region.”

Oversight and Transparency Questions Remain

Abortion Free New Mexico continues to raise concerns about:

• Lack of routine health inspections for abortion facilities
• Absence of a specific licensing category for abortion clinics
• Limited public reporting on complications and outcomes​

“If abortion is healthcare, why is it exempt from the same standards applied to other medical facilities?” Shaver added.

By Bud Shaver,

Albuquerque, N.M. — The reopening of the Zorro Ranch investigation in 2026, alongside the creation of a state “Truth Commission,” is renewing scrutiny over longstanding questions about oversight, enforcement, and accountability in New Mexico.The renewed attention comes after the original state investigation into Zorro Ranch was closed in 2019 without charges, despite the broader national context surrounding Jeffrey Epstein and documented federal investigative activity.At the same time, separate concerns have been raised regarding abortion oversight and enforcement practices in New Mexico, including questions about how referrals, regulations, and existing authorities are applied.

Together, these issues prompt a fundamental question: what determines when authority is used—and when it is not?

“In multiple high-profile contexts, state officials possessed clear legal authority to act. The public record indicates that in key instances, that authority was not exercised.”
— Tara Shaver, Abortion Free New Mexico

2019: An Exercise of Discretion

In 2019, the State of New Mexico discontinued its investigation into alleged criminal activity associated with Zorro Ranch, a property in Santa Fe County linked to financier Jeffrey Epstein, who had previously been convicted in Florida in 2008 for offenses involving a minor and was later charged at the federal level with sex trafficking offenses involving minors.

Despite that prior conviction, the public record raises questions about whether that history was fully reflected in how related activity in New Mexico was evaluated or prioritized.

Questions have also been raised about how sex offender registration laws were applied across jurisdictions, including whether Epstein’s presence and activities in New Mexico triggered any registration or reporting obligations under state law.

Public reporting and federal investigations had identified concerns related to activity connected to the property, including potential violations involving the exploitation of minors and related criminal conduct.

In 2019, the State of New Mexico discontinued its investigation under then–Attorney General Hector Balderas.

Public explanations indicated that federal prosecutors requested the state defer to an ongoing federal investigation.

However, under principles of concurrent jurisdiction, such requests do not limit a state’s independent authority to investigate potential violations of state law.

As Attorney General, Balderas retained full discretion to continue or expand the state’s investigation.

The decision to discontinue the case was his.

There is no indication in the public record that a court order required the state to stand down.

The outcome reflects a discretionary decision not to proceed with a state-level investigation.

This raises a broader question: was the decision not to pursue a state-level investigation influenced in any way by political considerations?

“The issue isn’t just what is happening—it’s whether anyone is willing to examine it. Authority means nothing if it’s not used.”
— Tara Shaver, Abortion Free New Mexico

If authority existed, and action did not follow, the question is not only what happened—but why.

Pre-2019 Context

If the 2019 decision reflects an exercise of discretion, it also raises a related question: what occurred in the years leading up to that decision?

The 2019 discontinuation did not occur in isolation. It followed a prolonged period in which no sustained state-level investigation is reflected in the public record, despite federal authorities identifying activity connected to New Mexico as early as 2006.

Federal investigative activity during that period included witness interviews, documented allegations, and the identification of locations associated with potential criminal conduct, including the Zorro Ranch property.

Yet the available public record does not reflect a comprehensive or sustained state-level investigation corresponding to that timeline.

This absence is notable given that state authorities maintained jurisdiction over potential violations of New Mexico law throughout that period.

If authority existed over more than a decade—and no sustained action is reflected in the record—the question extends beyond a single decision in 2019.

It raises a broader issue: whether enforcement authority was exercised consistently at any point during that timeframe.

As Tara Shaver has stated,

“The issue isn’t authority—it’s whether it’s used.”

Who Held the Authority

If the public record reflects limited sustained enforcement over more than a decade, the next question is straightforward: who had the authority to act during that time?Reporting by Alisa Valdes-Rodriguez identifies a pattern of overlapping roles, relationships, and institutional authority among key officials during the period when no meaningful state investigation moved forward.

Those individuals include:

• Former Attorney General Hector Balderas (D), who made the 2019 decision to discontinue the investigation
• Former Attorney General Gary King (D), whose family sold Zorro Ranch to Jeffrey Epstein and who, according to reporting, received campaign contributions linked to Epstein-associated entities while serving in office. Newly released records also indicate King had direct contact regarding use of Epstein’s private aircraft during his 2014 campaign and received more than $15,000 in contributions tied to Epstein.
• Former Governor Bill Richardson (D), identified in reporting as having documented associations with Epstein and who oversaw the state’s law enforcement structure during a period when no state-level investigation advanced. His name was later removed from a UNM Hospital building following renewed scrutiny tied to those disclosures.
• Former Santa Fe County Sheriff Greg Solano (D), whose office held jurisdiction over Zorro Ranch and who, according to reporting, received a campaign contribution from Epstein but conducted no known investigation. In a separate case, Solano was later charged with more than 200 counts of embezzlement involving the sale of public law enforcement equipment.

Each of these positions carried direct authority to initiate, pursue, or coordinate enforcement actions under New Mexico law.

These were the officials with the authority to act.
The public record reflects that such authority was not exercised.

While multiple officials held authority over time, the 2019 decision to discontinue the Zorro Ranch investigation ultimately rested with then–Attorney General Hector Balderas.

Federal Referral and Investigative Origin

If questions exist regarding how state authority was exercised in the context of Zorro Ranch, a related question emerges: how were similar oversight responsibilities handled in other areas where concerns were formally raised—including in the area of abortion-related practices?To fully understand the scope of oversight questions in New Mexico, it is necessary to examine how related concerns were addressed at the federal level—and what followed.​

Between 2015 and 2016, the U.S. House Select Panel on Infant Lives conducted a congressional investigation into fetal tissue procurement practices across the United States. That investigation resulted in criminal and regulatory referrals to federal and state authorities for further review.

Those referrals were not developed in isolation.They were informed, in part, by investigative documentation and public records research, including work conducted by Abortion Free New Mexico.According to national reporting, including coverage by the National Catholic Register, documentation obtained through these efforts contributed to congressional review of fetal tissue procurement practices involving New Mexico institutions, including the University of New Mexico.

These materials became part of the evidentiary record reviewed at the federal level and contributed to the issuance of congressional referrals for further investigation and potential enforcement action.

From Referral to Responsibility

As with the earlier context, these referrals did not resolve the issues on their own—they required action at the state level.

Where state jurisdiction applied, responsibility for review and enforcement rested with state authorities.

Available records indicate that these referrals did not result in state enforcement action.​

“The central question is whether those concerns were fully examined at the state level, or whether existing policy positions—including New Mexico leadership’s support for abortion— influenced how those matters were evaluated,” stated Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico.

From Authority to Accountability: A Pattern Observed

For Abortion Free New Mexico, these developments reflect more than isolated decisions—they point to a pattern observed over years of investigative work led by Tara Shaver.​

That work has included:

• Public records investigations involving state agencies and public institutions
• Submission of formal complaints and documentation of regulatory concerns
• Legislative engagement related to oversight and transparency
• Coordination with national organizations and federal review bodies

Through these efforts, Abortion Free New Mexico has documented recurring questions about how authority is exercised in practice, particularly in cases involving multiple institutions and overlapping jurisdictions.

This body of work has contributed to broader scrutiny of New Mexico’s role in national abortion policy, research, and regulatory oversight, including activity connected to public institutions such as the University of New Mexico.

​“The issue is not just what is happening—it’s whether anyone is willing to examine it.”— Tara Shaver

Now Apply That Same Question Elsewhere

For Abortion Free New Mexico, the same oversight questions extend beyond past investigations and into current abortion policy and practice.

New Mexico has become one of the most active abortion destinations in the country, with approximately21,000 abortions in 2023, including a significant number of patients traveling from out of state.At the same time, state leadership has articulated policy priorities focused on safeguarding and expanding abortion access, particularly in response to restrictions enacted in other states. Abortion Free New Mexico has also raised concerns about oversight practices, including how reported complications are addressed and whether clinic oversight—including inspections—is consistently applied.In practical terms, these factors can limit formal oversight mechanisms and raise broader questions about how existing authority is exercised in practice.​

The organization’s investigative work has included examination of programs and research connected to the University of New Mexico, including questions related to compliance, documentation, and institutional oversight.

“New Mexico leadership has made its priorities clear—safeguarding and expanding abortion access, particularly as other states restrict it. When reported abortion complications do not result in clear enforcement or consistent oversight, people will ask whether accountability is being applied consistently—or whether the system is effectively shielding the industry from scrutiny,” stated Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico.

Then and Now: Authority and Priorities

As attention turns to past decisions, it is equally important to examine how authority is being exercised today.New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez has expressed support for the state’s current abortion framework while also reopening aspects of the Zorro Ranch investigation in 2026. That contrast raises broader questions about how enforcement priorities are determined—and whether they are applied consistently.New Mexico’s current policy direction maintains expanded abortion access with limited regulatory structure, raising questions about how those priorities intersect with oversight.

“Public officials can hold policy views,”Shaver said.
“But the responsibility to ensure accountability should remain consistent, regardless of the issue.”

Same System. Same Outcome

The issue is not whether the cases are identical, but whether the same pattern appears when oversight is expected—and whether authority is used when it exists.

In one instance, state authority over alleged criminal activity at Zorro Ranch was clear for years, yet no sustained investigation advanced, and the case was ultimately discontinued in 2019.

In another, concerns were elevated to the federal level and formally referred for review following the U.S. House Select Panel on Infant Lives investigation. That evidence included documentation connected to New Mexico institutions, developed in part through investigative work associated with Abortion Free New Mexico.

Those referrals were intended to prompt further review. However, available records indicate no resulting state enforcement action, leaving it unclear to what extent those concerns were fully examined.Across both situations, the pattern is consistent:

• Authority identified
• Concerns documented
• Jurisdiction established
• Action unclear or absent

​Different issues. Same outcome: limited accountability.

A Broader Question About Independence and Accountability 

When oversight occurs within systems where leadership, institutions, and policy priorities are closely aligned, questions about independence naturally arise.

In the case of Zorro Ranch, concerns centered on relationships and influence within overlapping circles of authority. Those dynamics were largely implicit.

By contrast, in abortion policy, New Mexico’s leadership has openly articulated support for expanding access through legislation, funding, and integration within public institutions.

These priorities are stated—not inferred.

That distinction sharpens the question:​

If oversight appeared limited where influence was implicit, what should be expected where policy priorities are explicit?

Why This Matters Now

With aspects of the Zorro Ranch investigation being revisited in 2026, attention is shifting:

What wasn’t done before—and why?
And are similar patterns still occurring today?

​“Authority means nothing if it isn’t used. When leaders openly state their support for expanding abortion access—and when overlapping relationships and institutional ties exist within the same systems responsible for oversight—people will reasonably ask whether those factors influence what gets investigated, what doesn’t, and how decisions are made, including the decision to close the Zorro Ranch investigation.”— Tara Shaver, Abortion Free New Mexico

About Abortion Free New Mexico

Abortion Free New Mexico (AFNM) works to promote transparency and accountability regarding abortion policy and the abortion industry in New Mexico through investigative research, public records analysis, and public policy engagement.

AFNM’s work has been cited in state-level discussions, legislative engagement, and national reporting, including issues related to fetal tissue procurement and oversight practices.

The organization continues to advocate for greater transparency, consistent enforcement of existing laws, and accountability across all institutions involved in abortion-related practices.
​
More information and investigative reports are available at: AbortionFreeNM.com

Key Findings

• New Mexico operates roughly 78 school-based health clinics located in or near public schools statewide

• The state currently has no parental consent requirement and no parental notification law for minors seeking abortions​

• Some school-based clinics operate through partnerships with outside medical providers, including university-affiliated programs

By Bud Shaver,

Albuquerque, N.M. — New Mexico’s lack of parental notification requirements for abortion is drawing renewed scrutiny following the release of undercover videos suggesting school-based health clinics may be discussing abortion “options” with students during the school day.

The investigation has drawn attention to the statewide network of health clinics operating inside public schools, including significant concentrations within Albuquerque Public Schools.

The undercover footage, recorded at Highland High School in Albuquerque, raises additional questions about how school-based health clinics may be discussing pregnancy and abortion options, as well as transgender hormone therapy, with students during the school day.​
​
The footage, reported by Townhall Media at Highland High School in Albuquerque, describes what the outlet characterized as school systems enabling discussions about abortion and gender-related medical issues through in-house health clinics, where students may be called out of class for private consultations about pregnancy “options,”  including abortion.

📄 Read the Townhall report:
Undercover Videos Reveal New Mexico Schools Enable Trans, Abortion Activism With In-House Health Clinics.

Why This Matters

New Mexico currently has no parental notification requirement and no parental consent law for minors seeking abortions, placing the state among the least restrictive abortion policy environments in the country.

“Most parents assume they would be informed if their daughter were facing a serious medical decision,” said Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico.

​“In New Mexico, that basic safeguard doesn’t exist. A minor can obtain an abortion without her parents ever being notified. Parents deserve transparency when outside medical providers are operating clinics inside public schools.”

Shaver said the issue becomes even more concerning when medical clinics operated by outside providers function inside public schools, where students may receive counseling or referrals related to abortion or transgender-related services.
​
The policy landscape has drawn additional attention following undercover videos involving school-based health clinics in Albuquerque.

Lack of Parental Notification Laws

Abortion Free New Mexico notes that New Mexico has some of the least restrictive abortion laws in the country.

The state has:
• No parental consent requirement
• No parental notification law
• Few regulatory safeguards governing abortion providers compared to many other states

Many states require parental notification or consent before minors obtain abortions, but New Mexico currently has neither requirement.

“When a state removes parental notification safeguards while also allowing medical clinics inside schools, parents are left completely in the dark,” Shaver said.

Statewide Network of School-Based Health Clinics

School-based health clinics in New Mexico are typically operated through partnerships between public schools and outside medical providers, including community health organizations and university-affiliated medical programs.
​
Some clinics operate through partnerships connected to the University of New Mexico health system, which participates in several school-based health initiatives in Albuquerque.

Abortion Free New Mexico’s investigative map highlights:

• ​Approximately 78 school-based health clinics statewide
• Large concentrations in Albuquerque and other urban areas
• Programs operated through partnerships with university medical systems, community health providers and tribal health providers ​
• Click here for the full NEW MEXICO SBHC DIRECTORY 

“When medical services involving minors move inside public schools- including potential referrals for abortion– parents deserve transparency.” — Tara Shaver

Largest Concentration Located in Albuquerque

Abortion Free New Mexico notes that Albuquerque Public Schools hosts the largest (26) concentration of school-based health clinics in the state.

​Several of these clinics operate through partnerships with outside medical providers and university-affiliated health programs.

“Most parents assume they would be informed if their daughter were facing a serious medical decision. In New Mexico, that basic safeguard doesn’t exist.”
— Tara Shaver, Abortion Free New Mexico

Under current New Mexico law, minors can obtain abortions without parental consent or notification.

Calls for Federal Review of Taxpayer Funding

Abortion Free New Mexico also says the issue raises broader questions about how federal taxpayer funds may be flowing into programs connected to abortion-related services in New Mexico.

The state is among the most federally dependent in the country, receiving billions of dollars annually through programs such as Medicaid, federal education funding, and public health grants.​

AFNM says that reliance on federal funding makes it important to ensure that taxpayer dollars are not indirectly supporting programs connected to abortion referrals in school-based clinics.

​“Given New Mexico’s reliance on federal funding, federal agencies should review whether taxpayer dollars are supporting programs connected to abortion referrals in school-based clinics,” the organization said.

The group said a federal review could help determine whether existing safeguards and funding restrictions are being properly followed.Background:

Abortion Free New Mexico leaders have previously documented concerns involving taxpayer funding and abortion programs connected to the University of New Mexico health system.
​
📄 Background reports

About Abortion Free New Mexico

Abortion Free New Mexico works to promote transparency and accountability regarding abortion policy and the abortion industry in New Mexico through investigative research, public records analysis, and public policy engagement.

More information and investigative reports are available at: AbortionFreeNM.com

By Bud Shaver,

Albuquerque, New Mexico— Abortion Free New Mexico is commending investigative reporting by the New Mexico Sentinel after the outlet published an undercover video report showing how a New Mexico abortion clinic allegedly assists Texas residents — including minors — in circumventing Texas abortion restrictions.

The investigation raises new questions about cross-state abortion access, oversight, and the role New Mexico clinics play in serving patients from states with abortion bans.

• Read the full report by the New Mexico Sentinel: Undercover video shows how New Mexico clinic helps Texans circumvent abortion ban, even for underage pregnant teens

https://youtu.be/Chcoe1xp4cM

The report documents conversations in which clinic staff appear to explain how Texas patients can travel to New Mexico to obtain abortions that would be illegal in their home state.

New Mexico has some of the most permissive abortion laws in the country, allowing abortion at all stages of pregnancy and placing few statewide restrictions on the procedure.​

According to undercover footage published by the New Mexico Sentinel, a worker at Valley Abortion Group in Albuquerque described the clinic’s policy regarding late-term abortions:

“We go up to 34 weeks… so technically there is almost no deadline.”
— Valley Abortion Group worker, undercover recording obtained by the New Mexico Sentinel

According to Tara Shaver, spokesperson for Abortion Free New Mexico, the Sentinel investigationreinforces years of investigative research by the organization documenting how New Mexico has increasingly become a regional hub for abortion providers expanding services to out-of-state patients.​

Shaver said the Sentinel’s reporting brings national attention to concerns AFNM has raised for years about cross-state abortion access and limited regulatory oversight in New Mexico.

“We commend the Sentinel for bringing public attention to what our research has been documenting for years,” said Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico. “New Mexico’s lack of oversight has created a system where abortion businesses can openly market to patients from other states — including vulnerable minors — while operating with minimal regulatory scrutiny.”

AFNM Research Previously Documented Expansion

In a recent investigative report, Abortion Free New Mexico exposed the opening of a queer-led abortion facility in Albuquerque known as Valley Abortion Group. The center advertises abortions in all stages of pregnancy, including procedures late in pregnancy. 

The organization warned at the time that the facility represented part of a growing trend of abortion providers relocating or expanding operations into New Mexico following abortion bans in neighboring states.​

AFNM researchers also documented how some providers are positioning New Mexico as a destination for abortion patients traveling from states like Texas.The undercover footage published by the New Mexico Sentinel appears to confirm those concerns, documenting conversations in which clinic staff allegedly explain how patients from states like Texas can travel to New Mexico to obtain abortions that would be illegal in their home state.

Evidence of a Growing “Abortion Tourism” Pipeline

Abortion Free New Mexico has repeatedly warned that the rapid expansion of abortion services tied to interstate travel raises serious oversight and public safety questions.

A separate AFNM report highlighted what the group described as a growing “abortion tourism” infrastructure, including abortion funds, transportation networks, and clinic expansion designed to accommodate large numbers of out-of-state patients.​

National data has also shown a significant increase in abortions occurring in states where the procedure remains broadly legal after the Dobbs decision, with patients traveling from states that enacted restrictions.  

“The Sentinel investigation reinforces what we have been warning about,”Shaver said.
“New Mexico is rapidly becoming the epicenter of a cross-state abortion industry — yet state leaders continue to refuse meaningful oversight or transparency.”

The findings raise urgent questions about regulatory oversight, patient safety, and the role New Mexico now plays in the rapidly expanding interstate abortion network.

Calls for Transparency and Oversight

Abortion Free New Mexico is calling for state officials and regulators to answer several urgent questions raised by the Sentinel’s report:

• Are New Mexico clinics advising minors from other states on how to bypass parental involvement laws?
• What regulatory oversight exists for clinics marketing services to out-of-state patients?
• Are state agencies tracking complications or medical emergencies associated with this influx of patients?
• What role do abortion funds and interstate networks play in transporting patients into New Mexico?​

AFNM says these questions deserve immediate investigation by state officials.

“If abortion is being promoted as healthcare, then it should be held to the same transparency and accountability standards as every other medical industry,” said Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico. “When New Mexico is becoming a national destination for abortion providers and patients, the public has a right to know how this system is operating.”

About Abortion Free New Mexico

Abortion Free New Mexico is dedicated to exposing the abortion industry in New Mexico through investigative research, public records, and policy analysis. The organization also operates a sidewalk outreach team in Albuquerque that regularly and compassionately reaches out to women outside abortion facilities, including the Valley Abortion Group late-term abortion facility, offering support, resources, and alternatives.​

More information and reports are available at:
AbortionFreeNM.com

By Bud Shaver,

Albuquerque, New Mexico — Dr. Susan Robinson, a physician known for performing abortions later in pregnancy and who worked with providers in Albuquerque, has died. Her death is drawing renewed attention to New Mexico’s role in the national abortion industry and Albuquerque’s connection to one of the country’s most widely known facilities offering the procedure.

​Robinson’s death was confirmed in a public statement by abortion provider Dr. Shelly Sella, who worked alongside Robinson providing third-trimester abortion services in both Wichita, Kansas, and Albuquerque, New Mexico.

“Dr. Susan Robinson died this morning, less than a year from her cancer diagnosis,” Sella wrote in a public post. “Susan was my friend and colleague in third trimester abortion care, both in Wichita and Albuquerque… Together, we helped create a model of abortion care that lives on in our mentees.”

Robinson was widely known within abortion advocacy circles and was part of a small group of physicians who continued performing abortions later in pregnancy after the 2009 killing of Kansas abortion provider George Tiller. Following Tiller’s death, only a limited number of facilities in the United States continued publicly advertising the procedure, with Albuquerque emerging as one of the locations most frequently referenced in national reporting.

(After George Tiller’s death in 2009, a small network of physicians continued performing abortions later in pregnancy, including providers who traveled to Albuquerque, New Mexico.)

According to statements from abortion providers themselves, Robinson and other physicians, including Sella, traveled from California to Albuquerque on a rotating basis to perform abortions later in pregnancy, helping sustain the practice at facilities such as Curtis Boyd’s Southwestern Women’s Options.

Only a small number of facilities in the United States publicly advertise abortions later in pregnancy, and Albuquerque has long been one of those locations.

Following the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022, several states enacted abortion restrictions or bans. At the same time, New Mexico political leaders, including Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, promoted policies expanding abortion access in the state, positioning New Mexico as a destination for patients traveling from states where abortion laws had changed.

The expansion of access, combined with the absence of common-sense restrictions on abortion procedures in New Mexico, has drawn increasing national attention to what Abortion Free New Mexico’s investigative reporting has identified as a growing pattern of “abortion tourism” into the state.

National journalists have frequently cited Curtis Boyd’s Southwestern Women’s Options when covering abortions later in pregnancy in the United States, particularly after the death of George Tiller. Boyd’s clinic became a focal point in reporting about where such procedures continued to be performed in the years that followed.

Curtis Boyd himself has been a prominent national figure in late-term abortion, practicing for decades and helping establish Albuquerque as a location where abortions later in pregnancy continued to be performed after Tiller’s death.

The clinic later drew additional scrutiny after Abortion Free New Mexico exposed the 2017 death of Keisha Atkins, a young woman who died following a late-term abortion procedure at Southwestern Women’s Options. The case drew national attention and led to a civil lawsuit involving the clinic and medical providers connected to the procedure.

In the years that followed, Boyd sold Southwestern Women’s Options to the owner of Texas-based Alamo Women’s Clinic and later relocated to Florida, marking a significant transition for one of the most widely known facilities performing abortions later in pregnancy.

Tara Shaver, spokesperson for Abortion Free New Mexico, said Robinson’s passing highlights the broader history of the abortion industry’s concentration in New Mexico.

​“Dr. Susan Robinson was part of a small but influential group of physicians who helped sustain the late-term abortion industry in America,” Shaver said.“Her connection to Albuquerque underscores how New Mexico has become a focal point for abortions performed late in pregnancy.”

Shaver noted that Abortion Free New Mexico has spent years documenting the growth of the abortion industry in the state through investigative reports, public records requests, and policy analysis

​“For nearly two decades, Abortion Free New Mexico leaders have been warning that New Mexico was becoming what many now describe as the late-term abortion capital of America,”Shaver said. “Through investigative reporting, public records research, and on-the-ground documentation, our work has helped bring national attention to the policies, providers, and practices that allowed this industry to expand in our state.”

​According to the Guttmacher Institute’s provider survey, approximately 21,000 abortions occurred in New Mexico in 2023, with a significant number involving patients traveling from other states.​

Shaver said Robinson’s passing may also prompt renewed questions about the future of late-term abortion providers operating in the United States and whether additional physicians will continue the practice in states like New Mexico.

“Dr. Robinson was part of a small network of physicians who ensured that abortions later in pregnancy continued in the United States after George Tiller’s death,” said Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico. “Her work is part of the larger story of how New Mexico became a national hub for these procedures. The public deserves transparency about that history and about the policies that made it possible.”

Abortion Free New Mexico says it will continue documenting abortion industry practices and public policy developments in the state throughinvestigative reporting, public records research, and community outreach.​

The history of providers such as Tiller, Boyd, and Robinson — combined with New Mexico’s post-Roe policy landscape — continues to place Albuquerque at the center of national conversations about where abortions later in pregnancy are performed in the United States.

About Abortion Free New Mexico

Abortion Free New Mexico is dedicated to investigative research, public education, and peaceful outreach regarding abortion practices and policies in New Mexico.

Through public records investigations, policy analysis, and on-the-ground outreach, the organization documents the growth of the abortion industry in the state and its national impact.

New Mexico at a Crossroads: Sovereignty, Public Safety, and Child Well-Being Under Scrutiny

By Bud Shaver,

Albuquerque, New Mexico — As global instability rises and national security concerns intensify, leadership choices are no longer abstract. Border enforcement, violent crime, energy independence, constitutional rights, and the protection of children are not theoretical debates — they are immediate realities shaping New Mexico’s future.

At moments of national seriousness, presence matters. While the nation gathered for the State of the Union to confront escalating global and domestic challenges, all but one member of New Mexico’s Democrat delegation chose not to attend. The absence was widely noted.

This was not passive absence.
It was a deliberate political statement.

President Trump’s address emphasized economic nationalism, border security, energy independence, and what he described as renewed “America First” strength. He highlighted tax cuts, deregulation, domestic manufacturing growth, tougher trade enforcement, stricter immigration policy, expanded support for law enforcement and the military, and stronger domestic energy production — framing his agenda as restoring sovereignty and stability through strength.

In a time of elevated border pressure and global uncertainty, those themes defined the national conversation.

The contrast was unmistakable.
“When the nation confronts crisis, leaders show up. Choosing not to is not neutrality — it’s a declaration.”
Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico said posture communicates priorities:“In serious times, presence signals alignment. Boycott signals opposition. Voters notice the difference.”

 (Boycotting American Progress? – State of Disunion)

New Mexico is not a distant observer in national policy debates. It is a border state. Federal immigration enforcement decisions directly impact communities across the state — from rural counties to urban centers. Yet recent legislative sessions advanced measures limiting certain forms of cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Counties seeking stronger alignment with federal enforcement efforts have reported resistance and, in some cases, financial pressure.

At a time when border security remains a top national concern, Shaver argues that voters deserve clarity on the state’s direction.

“If strengthening sovereignty is essential in dangerous times, why is New Mexico moving away from it?”

Energy policy presents another contradiction. New Mexico’s public education system and state budget rely heavily on oil and gas revenue. Historic budget surpluses in recent years have been fueled by domestic energy production. Those revenues support schools, infrastructure, and public services across the state.

Yet alongside that reliance, policy pressure continues targeting the very industry funding those programs. Relying on energy revenue while politically constraining domestic production reflects a serious policy contradiction.

Public safety further intensifies the concern. New Mexico consistently ranks among the highest states nationally in violent crime. Communities continue to face persistent safety challenges. Meanwhile, legislative sessions prioritized expanded firearm restrictions — proposals slowed or narrowed only after public scrutiny.

Shaver contends that priorities matters.

“When crime ranks among the highest in America, targeting constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens is not leadership — it’s misdirected priorities.”

(New Mexico on the Brink – What New Mexicans Need vs What Democrats Are Doing)

Children, Outcomes, and Contradiction

Perhaps the most sobering contradiction involves children.

According to the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s national rankings, New Mexico has consistently ranked near 50th in child well-being indicators, including education and economic stability metrics. Literacy proficiency and graduation readiness remain persistent statewide concerns.

At the same time, New Mexico has positioned itself as one of the most permissive abortion states in the country, expanding access and reducing certain reporting requirements. According to the Guttmacher Institute’s 2023 provider survey estimate, New Mexico reported approximately 21,000 abortions in a single year, including a significant number involving out-of-state patients.

Shaver addressed the contradiction directly:

“New Mexico leadership says it cares about children — but continues expanding abortion while our state ranks near last in child well-being. You cannot claim to protect children while expanding policies that end their lives before birth.”

She continued:

“If children matter, every child matters — including the child in the womb.”

The organization argues this is not merely ideological. It is about coherence. If public policy claims to prioritize children, measurable improvements should follow.

Accountability Remains a Defining Issue

Accountability was a recurring concern throughout this legislative session. Multiple proposals affecting transparency, reporting standards, and enforcement oversight raised questions about whether public scrutiny is expanding — or contracting.

As national conversations intensify around elite networks and political responsibility, one fact remains:

Zorro Ranch was not in Washington, D.C. — it was in Santa Fe County, New Mexico.

Jeffrey Epstein operated there for years. Public records show the ranch was purchased in 1993 from the family of former Democratic Governor Bruce King — a documented real estate transaction. That fact alone does not imply wrongdoing by the King family. However, it confirms that Epstein’s operations were rooted in this state.

Former Democratic Governor Bill Richardson was later publicly named in reporting tied to Epstein, and amid controversy, the University of New Mexico removed his name from a campus building.

These developments underscore a broader point: when national scrutiny intensifies, New Mexico cannot assume distance from the issue.​

Shaver said accountability must be consistent.

“If transparency is demanded nationally, it must be applied locally. Accountability cannot be selective. If oversight is the standard, it begins at home.”​

During this legislative session, AFNM’s reports raised additional concerns about transparency, reporting requirements, and regulatory enforcement in other policy areas as well. Shaver argues that accountability is not partisan — it is structural.

“Public trust is not built by shielding institutions from scrutiny. It is built by allowing scrutiny and welcoming independent review.”

When oversight appears limited and public questions remain unresolved, confidence erodes. And when confidence erodes, accountability becomes more urgent — not less.

Election Integrity and Sovereign Authority Under Review

Beyond border policy and public safety metrics, additional questions have emerged surrounding election integrity and sovereign authority.

New Mexico does not require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote. While federal law prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections, registration processes rely primarily on attestation rather than mandatory document verification.​

In addition, access to voter rolls has remained shielded from certain independent audit efforts. State officials maintain that existing safeguards are sufficient. However, critics argue that verification strengthens confidence, while limitation of independent review weakens public trust.

Shaver framed the issue as one of transparency rather than accusation.

“If our system is secure, why resist greater transparency?”Shaver asked.
“Confidence in elections comes from verification, not assurances.”

The organization emphasizes that raising questions about verification is not an allegation of fraud, but rather a call for strengthened public confidence during a time of heightened national sensitivity around election security.​

In moments of instability, transparency becomes stabilizing.

Law Enforcement Eligibility Expansion (SB 364)

In 2025, New Mexico enacted legislation allowing illegal aliens to qualify for law enforcementpositions.

Supporters argue the change expands the applicant pool and reflects modern workforce realities. Critics, however, argue that the policy alters long-standing citizenship expectations for positions carrying sovereign authority.

Law enforcement officers exercise arrest power, use-of-force authority, and public trust responsibilities. For generations, those roles have been closely associated with citizenship status.

Shaver raised concerns about the timing and optics of the policy shift.

“Law enforcement carries sovereign authority — arrest power, use of force, public trust,” Shaver stated.
“Why are we lowering citizenship expectations at the very moment national security concerns are rising?”

The organization argues that such changes, when combined with broader debates over immigration enforcement cooperation, warrant public scrutiny and open discussion.

​(Hard Questions for New Mexico Leaders)

A Broader Pattern of Direction

When examined individually, each of these issues can be debated on its own terms. But when viewed collectively, a consistent contrast emerges — particularly in relation to President Trump’s stated America First agenda.

President Trump has framed his national priorities around border enforcement, domestic energy production, strengthened law enforcement standards, election verification, constitutional protections, and opposition to abortion expansion. In each of those areas, New Mexico’s current leadership has advanced policies that move in a different direction.

On immigration enforcement, cooperation has been limited in a border state. On energy, regulatory pressure has increased despite record revenue dependence. On firearms policy, additional restrictions have been prioritized while violent crime remains elevated. On abortion, infrastructure has expanded even as child well-being rankings remain near the bottom nationally. On election integrity, expanded verification proposals encounter resistance framed as unnecessary.

Taken together, these are not minor disagreements. They represent a sustained policy divergence.

Tara Shaver says voters should evaluate that divergence carefully.

“President Trump has been clear about his America First priorities,” she said.
“New Mexico leadership has been equally clear about moving in a different direction. Voters deserve to ask whether that direction is producing better outcomes for families here at home.”

The question, she argues, is not about personalities but priorities.

If the national agenda emphasizes sovereignty, domestic production, constitutional defense, and stronger enforcement — and state leadership consistently advances alternatives — then voters are justified in asking what framework is guiding those decisions.

“When policy repeatedly conflicts with border security, energy strength, law enforcement standards, and protection of children, people are going to ask: What vision is driving this?” Shaver said.

The organization reiterates that its concerns are framed around measurable outcomes and governance direction, not personal allegations.

As America confronts global instability, domestic unrest, and rising security questions, the cumulative pattern of policy choices in New Mexico is drawing increased scrutiny.

• Border enforcement questioned.
• Energy production pressured.
• Violent crime elevated.
• Child well-being near last.
• Abortion expanded.
• Election verification debated.
• Sovereign authority standards adjusted.
• All but one member of the delegation absent during a defining national address.

Shaver says the cumulative pattern is what voters must evaluate.

“These are not isolated policies. They reflect ideological alignment. And alignment determines outcomes.”

America faces serious global and domestic challenges. In serious times, governance priorities matter. Transparency should not be feared. Verification should not be resisted. Sovereignty should not be diluted. Children should not be overlooked. Public safety should not remain stagnant.

These are not partisan slogans. They are foundational expectations of accountable leadership.​

All eyes are on New Mexico.

Leadership is measured not by slogans, but by results. Not by symbolism, but by substance.

The question before New Mexicans is not abstract.

Will New Mexico leadership fortify the state — strengthen sovereignty, improve child outcomes, enhance public safety, and increase transparency — or continue policies that fail to improve measurable results at a moment when America stands on the brink?

That is the debate now unfolding in New Mexico.

Is This the Legacy the Governor Wants to Solidify?
By Bud Shaver,

Santa Fe, New Mexico

–The 2026 legislative session is being promoted as a year of healthcare reform.But when the full legislative stack is examined, one sector appears to benefit more than any other:

The abortion industry.This session delivered:

• Interstate licensure expansion (SB 1 and related compacts)
• Malpractice liability refinements under HB 99
• Elimination of uniform statewide abortion reporting under SB 30
• Existing shield law protections left intact

Individually, these bills are framed as reform.

Collectively, they expand access, stabilize liability, preserve insulation, and remove transparency — within one specific sector.​

No other healthcare industry received that combination.

HB 99: Liability Carefully Protected

House Judiciary, under Chair Rep. Christine Chandler (D), spent hours refining malpractice language in HB 99.

• Eleven amendments were considered.
• Definitions were debated line by line.
• Exposure standards were meticulously examined.​

​Liability protections were treated as serious business.

They were refined.
They were structured.
They were protected.

SB 30: Transparency Eliminated After Being Fast-Tracked

In contrast, SB 30 — eliminating uniform statewide abortion reporting beginning in 2026 — was fast-tracked through the Senate and given only a single hearing in House Judiciary before advancing.

• Testimony was limited.
• Survivors were cut off mid-statement.
• No serious transparency amendments were adopted.
• The bill advanced swiftly.

While liability exposure was refined for hours, abortion transparency was removed in minutes.​

That contrast defines the session.

Where Were the Amendments?

During HB 99, amendments flowed.

During SB 30, they did not.

AFNM asks:​

• Why were eleven amendments debated on liability but none seriously pursued to preserve abortion transparency?
• Why did Republicans not attempt to amend SB 30 to retain reporting safeguards?
• Why eliminate reporting instead of enforcing it?

“When liability protections were at stake, lawmakers refined and amended,” Shaver said. “When transparency protections were at stake, they were removed.”

The Data Question

According to the Guttmacher Institute’s 2023 provider survey estimate:​

• Approximately 21,000 abortions occurred in New Mexico
• Roughly 71% of patients traveled from out of state

Abortion providers were 

capable of submitting that data to a private organization.

But SB 30 eliminates mandatory reporting to the State of New Mexico.

The issue is not burden.
The issue is who receives the data.

When reporting becomes voluntary, verification disappears.

Abortion Clinics and Regulatory Gaps

Hospitals are inspected.
Nursing homes are inspected.​
Ambulatory surgical centers are inspected.

Abortion facilities in New Mexico do not operate under a distinct abortion-clinic licensing and inspection structure requiring routine state inspections comparable to hospitals.

With SB 30:

• Uniform statewide abortion reporting disappears
• Verification becomes harder
• Public access to official data vanishes

“Healthcare transparency and inspection standards should be consistent,” said Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico. “If abortion is healthcare, then it should meet the same reporting and inspection expectations as other regulated medical sectors.”

Abortion Providers Stand to Gain the Most

Combine the full 2026 policy structure:​

• Expanded interstate workforce access
• Maintained shield law protections
• Refined malpractice exposure
• Eliminated mandatory abortion reporting
• No distinct abortion-clinic inspection framework

The result:

• Access expands.
• Liability stabilizes.
• Transparency shrinks.
• Inspection remains limited.

That structural convergence disproportionately benefits abortion providers.

Independent physicians may benefit from malpractice reform.

Abortion providers benefit from malpractice reform, shield protections, expanded entry pathways, and reduced oversight — simultaneously.

No other healthcare sector receives that convergence.

“When those shifts happen together in one sector,” Shaver said, “the public has every right to ask who really benefits.”

The Legacy Question

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has framed medical malpractice reform as a defining part of her legacy.

But reform is judged by outcomes.

“If this session’s healthcare reform becomes the Governor’s legacy,” said Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico, “then that legacy will include expanded access for abortion providers, refined liability protections for abortion providers, preserved shield protections for abortion providers — and the elimination of abortion reporting to the public.”

She continued:

“Is insulating the abortion industry while eliminating transparency what the Governor wants solidified as her legacy? Because that is what this legislative stack accomplishes.”

Why This Matters

This is not about partisan rhetoric.

It is about how oversight  is structured.

When high-volume abortion services operate in a state that:

• Expands interstate access
• Limits out-of-state consequences
• Refines liability exposure
• Eliminates mandatory reporting
• Lacks a distinct inspection framework

Oversight contracts while protection expands.

That is measurable.
That is policy.
That is legacy.

Questions That Demand Answers

• Why eliminate mandatory abortion reporting instead of enforcing compliance?
• Why refine liability exposure while reducing transparency?
• Why does abortion operate without a distinct inspection structure?
• Why did amendments flow on liability but not on transparency?
• Is this combination of protections and reduced oversight intentional?​

“Reduced exposure. Reduced transparency. Expanded abortion access,” Tara Shaver said. “If that is the structure being constructed, then the abortion industry is the clear beneficiary — and the public deserves honesty about it.”​

UPDATE: After lawmakers acknowledged a lack of enforcement and moved to erase reporting requirements, a new bill sponsor shifted the debate to fear-based arguments to advance SB 30.By Bud Shaver,Santa Fe, New Mexico- 

Senate Bill 30 (SB 30), which eliminates New Mexico’s remaining abortion reporting requirements, has passed the Senate Judiciary Committee along party lines and now advances to the New Mexico Senate floor. If it is passed on the senate floor it will go through two house committees and then the house floor before it reaches the governor.

Rather than enforcing existing law, legislators openly acknowledged during committee hearings that abortion reporting requirements are being ignored — and then voted to erase them entirely.

🔗 Read AFNM’s full legislative summary

Two Hearings. One Outcome: Remove Transparency Instead of Enforcing the Law

SB 30 was debated in two senate committees, where legislators shifted the focus away from oversightand toward fear-based arguments about abortion provider exposure.

🎥  Senate Health & Public Affairs Committee
📍 SB 30 debate begins at 4:09:30

During the first hearing, lawmakers acknowledged that abortion reporting laws are not being enforced. Instead of correcting that failure, the committee advanced the legislation to eliminate abortion reporting altogether.

Tara Shaver, spokeswoman for Abortion Free New Mexico, responded:

“Reporting is not a burden — it is accountability. Abortion providers already collect extensive data voluntarily. What they object to is not record-keeping, but public accountability.”

Following the Health & Public Affairs Committee hearing, Sen. Cindy Nava (D) joined SB 30 as a bill sponsor, and the debate took a decisive turn.

🎥  Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing
📍 SB 30 debate begins at 5:21:20

Supporters reframed the bill around fear, claiming abortion providers could be doxed, targeted, or placed into government databases if reporting requirements remain in place — rather than addressing enforcement of existing law or public accountability.

This shift moved the discussion away from:

• public accountability,
• patient safety,
• data integrity, and
• enforcement of existing law.

Tara Shaver, Abortion Free New Mexico:

“SB 30 isn’t about patient privacy — it’s about secrecy. Doctors who deliver babies don’t fear transparency. Erasing abortion reporting protects the abortion industry from public accountability.”

Bottom Line

SB 30 removes safeguards, not stigma — and leaves taxpayers, lawmakers, and the public in the dark. SB 30 is now before the full New Mexico Senate. Instead of enforcing existing abortion reporting law, lawmakers are moving to erase transparency altogether.

TAKE ACTION: CALL Your State Senator

🔗 Find your senator

online to email or call. (Be sure to drop down to Senate tab)

Or Contact the New Mexico Legislative Switchboard: 

(505) 986-4300

(Use this option if you know who your sentator is or find them first.)

📍Tip: Calls take less than one minute and are logged by legislative staff.​Ask the operator to connect you to your State Senator.

Calls are accepted during regular business hours.

WHAT TO SAY WHEN YOU CALL

• “Hello, I’m a New Mexico constituent.”
• “I’m calling to urge the Senator to vote NO on SB 30.”

EMAIL YOUR SENATOR ​

​If you’re unable to call, sending an email is just as effective.

• Find your state senator here:
   https://www.nmlegis.gov/members/find_my_legislator
• Click on your senator’s name to access their official email address.
• Use the message below — simply copy and paste.

​

📍Tip: Emails are logged by staff and shared with legislators when bills are under consideration.

SIMPLY COPY AND PASTE: ​

Dear Senator,

I am writing as a New Mexico constituent and a person of faith to urge you to vote NO on Senate Bill 30.

As someone guided by Christian principles, I believe transparency, accountability, and truth are moral responsibilities in public life. SB 30 removes abortion reporting requirements instead of enforcing existing law, eliminating basic public oversight and accountability.

When public policy involves human life and taxpayer dollars, secrecy is not acceptable. Reporting laws exist to protect the public, inform lawmakers, and ensure accountability—values that align with both good governance and moral responsibility.

I respectfully ask you to oppose SB 30 and stand for transparency, enforcement of the law, and the public’s right to know.

Thank you for your service to our state and for considering my concerns.
Sincerely,

[Your Name]
[City], New Mexico

MORE INFORMATION & PAST REPORTS ON SB 30 AND ABORTION TRANSPARENCY

For additional background, documentation, and analysis related to SB 30, abortion reporting, and New Mexico’s long history of secrecy and shielded power, review Abortion Free New Mexico’s prior reports:

🔗 SB 30 Advances: Lawmakers Admit Abortion Reporting Law Is Being Ignored—Vote to Erase It Instead

🔗 From Zorro Ranch to Abortion Tourism: How New Mexico Became a Destination for Secrecy

These reports document:

• legislative hearing testimony and committee actions,
• admissions that abortion reporting laws are not being enforced,
• the removal of transparency safeguards rather than enforcement, and
• New Mexico’s broader pattern of secrecy and lack of accountability involving powerful interests.

📌 For ongoing updates, documentation, and action alerts, visit:
AbortionFreeNM.com

By Bud Shaver,

​Santa Fe, New Mexico—As Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham continues to emphasize medical malpractice reform as part of her administration’s legacy and calls for political “unity,” Abortion Free New Mexico (AFNM) is calling attention to a critical contradiction that remains unaddressed: abortion clinics in New Mexico continue to operate exempt from basic healthcare licensing, inspection, and enforcement standards, despite documented patient harm.

Recent reporting by The New Mexico Sun has highlighted the administration’s emphasis on malpractice reform as a policy priority. AFNM notes that this focus on liability reform stands in sharp contrast to state policies that shield abortion facilities from the routine oversight applied to hospitals, surgical centers, and physician practices throughout New Mexico.

AFNM’s source-documented report details more than a decade of abortion-related patient injuries, emergency medical transports, and at least one patient death occurring in facilities not licensed as healthcare providers. These documented incidents raise serious questions about patient safety, regulatory consistency, and the credibility of claims that abortion is being treated as healthcare under state law.

AFNM emphasized that its call for accountability concerns regulatory standards and patient safety — not the legality of abortion. The organization is calling for the consistent application of healthcare licensing, inspection, and enforcement requirements that apply to other medical facilities in New Mexico.

Unlike hospitals, surgical centers, and physician practices, abortion clinics in New Mexico are not subject to routine facility inspections, licensing requirements, or transparent enforcement mechanisms — even as the state positions itself as a destination for abortion services.

(Graphic illustrating the exemption of abortion clinics from routine healthcare licensing and inspection requirements in New Mexico.)

“Since abortion is repeatedly described as ‘healthcare,’ it must be subject to healthcare standards,” said Tara Shaver, spokeswoman for Abortion Free New Mexico.
​
“Healthcare requires standards, inspections, and accountability — and it does not maim or kill. Abortion fulfills none of those requirements in New Mexico, yet it is repeatedly labeled ‘healthcare’ while being exempt from the rules that govern real medicine.”

​Shaver added that calls for political unity cannot be used to obscure documented regulatory failures.

“Calls for unity ring hollow when they are used to protect a political legacy while documented harm goes unaddressed,” she said.
​
“The public record shows that exempting abortion clinics from basic healthcare standards has resulted in patient injuries and a death. Accountability cannot be set aside for political convenience.”

AFNM emphasized that the issue is not theoretical, partisan, or speculative. As New Mexico increasingly positions itself as a regional destination for abortion services, patient volume has increased without corresponding oversight or enforcement — deepening the regulatory gap.

AFNM also noted that bipartisan silence on the issue has allowed the contradiction to persist.

“Lawmakers are not powerless here,” Shaver added.
​
“When Republicans and Democrats alike avoid confronting this exemption, they help entrench a double standard that no patient would tolerate in any other area of medicine. Silence does not equal unity—it entrenches regulatory failure.”

​AFNM stressed that malpractice reform, if pursued without addressing oversight exemptions, risks insulating systems from accountability rather than improving patient safety. The organization argues that meaningful reform must include consistent standards across all areas of healthcare, especially where documented harm has occurred.Abortion Free New Mexico is calling on the Governor and the New Mexico Legislature to publicly explain:

• Why abortion clinics remain exempt from healthcare licensing and routine inspections
• How abortion-related patient injuries and deaths are investigated
• What accountability mechanisms exist when patient harm occurs

“Exemptions are not unity. Silence is not reform,” Shaver said.

📄 Read AFNM’s source-documented report:
​GOVERNOR TIES LEGACY TO MALPRACTICE REFORM WHILE STATE SHIELDS ABORTION CLINICS FROM ACCOUNTABILITY

📰 Related media coverage:
The New Mexico Sun — 

Governor’s malpractice reform goals clash with state policies on abortion clinic oversight

​📘 Additional public-record information on abortion risks!

By Bud Shaver,

​Albuquerque, N.M. — On the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, as elected officials and advocacy groups mark the decision by reaffirming abortion as “healthcare,” Abortion Free New Mexico (AFNM) is demanding that Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and New Mexico’s federal congressional delegation publicly address — on the record — serious and unresolved concerns regarding abortion facility oversight, documented patient injuries, and the absence of accountability in New Mexico.

The anniversary of Roe is routinely used to celebrate abortion access. AFNM states it must also be used to confront the current reality in New Mexico: abortion facilities operating without routine inspections, facility-level enforcement, or public accountability, despite documented injuries and emergency medical transports.

 “If abortion is being labeled ‘healthcare,’ then it must meet healthcare standards,” said Tara Shaver, spokeswoman for Abortion Free New Mexico.  

​“Healthcare requires standards, inspections, and accountability — and it does not maim or kill. Abortion fulfills none of those requirements in New Mexico, yet it is repeatedly labeled ‘healthcare’ while being exempt from the rules that govern real medicine.”

Roe Anniversary, Real-World Consequences​

Public records documented by Abortion Free New Mexico show abortion-related injuries, emergency medical transports, and a significant increase in out-of-state abortion travel into New Mexico. At the same time, abortion facilities remain exempt from routine inspection, enforcement, and public reporting requirements that apply to other medical providers under state law.​

Despite these facts, state and federal officials have not publicly addressed who is responsible for oversight, how patient harm is investigated, or what enforcement mechanisms exist.

Demand for Public Statements — Not Messaging

Abortion Free New Mexico is calling on the Governor and New Mexico’s federal delegation to publicly address — in clear, substantive statements — the following public-health and accountability questions:

• Which agencies hold routine inspection and enforcement authority over abortion facilities in New Mexico
• How patient injuries and medical emergencies are identified, investigated, and corrected
• What oversight applies to high-volume abortion care involving non-resident patients
• How emergency coordination and patient safety are ensured when complications occur
• Whether state and federal officials support an independent review or audit of abortion-related injuries and interstate abortion activity

AFNM emphasizes that anniversary statements, slogans, or social media posts do not constitute accountability. Public accountability requires direct answers to documented oversight failures.

“Asking oversight questions on the anniversary of Roe is not an attack,” Shaver said. “Refusing to answer them — while continuing to celebrate abortion as healthcare — is an attack on women’s health.”

A One-Party State, No Public Answers

New Mexico is governed entirely by one political party, which controls the Governor’s Office, both chambers of the Legislature, the congressional delegation, and regulatory agencies. AFNM states that the continued absence of public answers on abortion oversight raises serious concerns about transparency and accountability in a one-party state.​

Public records document:​

• Abortion-related injuries to women
• Emergency 911 calls and hospital transports from abortion facilities
• A surge in out-of-state abortion tourism as New Mexico positions itself as a destination state

Detailed documentation of abortion-related risks and patient harm is available here: ​

• Abortion-Related Risks & Patient Harm (Source Documentation)

Abortion Free New Mexico is demanding clear public statements that directly address these concerns, which will be documented and preserved as part of the public record.

By Bud Shaver,

Albuquerque, New Mexico — As the New Mexico Legislature opens its 2026 legislative session on January 20, 2026, Abortion Free New Mexico is responding to Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s call for residents to“advocate effectively on what matters most to your family.” The organization agrees — and says families deserve honest answers as the Governor continues to label abortion as “healthcare,” despite public records documenting injuries, emergencies, and a regulatory system that exempts abortion from basic medical standards.

I need your family’s voice at this year’s legislative session. As the session gets underway, parental and family perspectives are more important than ever.

Whether it's education, healthcare, childcare, or community safety—the issues being decided affect your daily life. That's… pic.twitter.com/vWzBiEi49t

— Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (@GovMLG) January 17, 2026

​The Governor has called for “family voices” to engage this session, saying decisions on healthcare and public safety affect daily life for New Mexicans.

Families agree — and they are raising serious concerns.

In New Mexico, abortion is labeled “healthcare” by political leaders, yet abortion facilities are not held to the same basic standards required of legitimate medical providers. Unlike hospitals, clinics, and other healthcare facilities, abortion facilities operate without routine inspections, without transparent enforcement, and without accountability when patients are harmed.

Make your voice heard.

Abortion Free New Mexico is asking families and the public to stay engaged this legislative session. Transparency and participation matter—New Mexicans can watch proceedings, attend hearings, and share how policies affect their lives.  

• Watch every committee meeting and floor session: WATCH ONLINE HERE
• Find and contact your legislator: CONTACT HERE
• Participate in public comment via Zoom or phone by viewing the daily committee schedule: GET INVOLVED

The Abortion Oversight Gap in New Mexico — comparison of regulated healthcare standards versus abortion facility exemptions.  ​(Graphic courtesy: Abortion Free New Mexico)

Public records document:​

• Abortion-related injuries to women
• Emergency 911 calls and hospital transports from abortion facilities
• A surge in out-of-state abortion tourism as New Mexico positions itself as a destination state

Detailed documentation of abortion-related risks and patient harm is available here: 

• Abortion-Related Risks & Patient Harm (Source Documentation)

Physicians Are Leaving New Mexico

At the same time, licensed physicians and healthcare professionals are leaving New Mexico, citing an increasingly hostile environment for ethical medical practice — one where abortion is shielded from oversight while legitimate providers face heightened regulatory pressure, liability risk, and declining professional standards.

“Healthcare requires standards, inspections, and accountability — and it does not maim or kill,” said Tara Shaver, spokeswoman for Abortion Free New Mexico. “Abortion fulfills none of those requirements in New Mexico, yet it is repeatedly labeled ‘healthcare’ while being exempt from the rules that govern real medicine.”

Shaver said the issue ultimately comes down to honesty and accountability.

“This is not about ideology,” Shaver said. “It is about whether words still mean anything. If abortion is healthcare, then it should be held to healthcare standards. If abortion facilities cannot meet those standards, they should not receive taxpayer funding and should not be allowed to continue operating without accountability.”

Abortion Free New Mexico emphasized that the consequences of the state’s approach extend beyond abortion policy itself.

“When government protects one industry at all costs — even when patients are harmed — it undermines trust in the entire healthcare system,” Shaver said. “Families lose confidence, doctors leave, and standards erode.”

As lawmakers begin deliberations this session, Abortion Free New Mexico is calling on legislators, regulators, and the media to confront the documented reality behind the rhetoric and restore basic healthcare standards that protect women, families, and the integrity of medicine in New Mexico.

Source documentation and public records:

• ABORTION FREE NEW MEXICO REPORTS
• Abortion-Related Risks & Patient Harm (Source Documentation)

By Bud Shaver,

Albuquerque, New Mexico — As the 2026 New Mexico Legislative Session begins January 20, Abortion Free New Mexico has released a comprehensive report documenting a longstanding regulatory gap in state healthcare policy: abortion clinics in New Mexico are not subject to routine health inspections under state law, even as abortion volume and out-of-state patient travel continue to increase.

The report, titled New Mexico’s Abortion Oversight Gap: Expanded Access Without Routine Health Inspections, compiles more than a decade of public records, emergency response data, court filings, and investigative reporting related to abortion-related injuries, medical emergencies, and patient harm in New Mexico.

“New Mexico has made deliberate policy choices to expand abortion access and welcome out-of-state patients, while simultaneously exempting abortion clinics from routine health inspections,” said Tara Shaver, spokeswoman for Abortion Free New Mexico. “Our report documents the real-world consequences of that contradiction and raises serious questions about patient safety.”

According to the report, more than 50 abortion-related injuries and medical emergencies have been identified in New Mexico since 2010, including at least one documented patient death. None of these incidents were uncovered through a routine inspection process, because abortion clinics are not placed on a regular inspection cycle comparable to hospitals, nursing homes, or ambulatory surgical centers.

The report also clarifies that while some abortion facilities maintain federal Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) certification, CLIA applies only to laboratory testing standards and does not evaluate abortion procedures, facility conditions, infection control, emergency preparedness, or overall patient safety.

“This is not a debate about abortion access,” Shaver emphasized. “It is a question of whether the state applies basic, consistent health and safety standards across medical facilities. Routine inspections are a baseline safeguard. Abortion clinics remain exempt by policy choice.”

Political Control and Accountability Context

New Mexico’s abortion oversight framework exists within a broader political environment characterized by unified Democratic control across all major branches of state government.

As of the current legislative session:

• New Mexico Senate (42 seats): 26 Democrats / 16 Republicans
• New Mexico House of Representatives (70 seats): 44 Democrats / 26 Republicans
• U.S. House of Representatives (New Mexico – 3 seats): 100% Democratic
• U.S. Senate (New Mexico – 2 seats): 100% Democratic
• New Mexico Supreme Court: 5 Democrats (5 of 5 justices)
• Governor: Democrat

Because abortion clinic inspection and licensing standards are established through state statute and regulation, responsibility for oversight rests squarely with state policymakers.

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has publicly stated:

“As long as I am governor, abortion will continue to be legal, safe, and accessible in New Mexico.”

Abortion Free New Mexico notes that safety is not achieved through declarations alone, but through enforceable oversight mechanisms established in law. If patient safety is a genuine priority, ensuring that abortion clinics are subject to routine health inspections comparable to other medical facilities is a necessary and measurable step.

“History suggests that policymakers who prioritize abortion access above all else are reluctant to impose routine oversight on abortion facilities, even when safety concerns are documented,” Shaver said. “That doesn’t mean reform is impossible — but it rarely happens without sustained public scrutiny.”

Because New Mexico’s abortion oversight framework is a product of unified legislative and executive control, accountability for correcting documented failures rests with the same policymakers who enacted the current system.

Legislative Authority and Responsibility

“As the Legislature considers healthcare priorities during the 2026 session, policymakers have an obligation to examine abortion clinic oversight statutes in light of what the public record already shows,” said Shaver.

“Documented injuries, medical emergencies, and the absence of routine health inspections are not abstract concerns — they are measurable outcomes of policy choices. When facilities are exempt from baseline oversight, risks are addressed only after harm occurs. The Legislature has the authority to review this framework, and with that authority comes responsibility.”

Report and Documentation

The full report, including a timeline of documented incidents and supporting source material, is available online:

•  https://www.abortionfreenm.com/news/new-mexicos-abortion-oversight-gap-expanded-access-without-routine-health-inspections

Related Analysis

•  Gerrymandered Into One-Party Rule: New Mexico’s Life-and-Death Crisis

(Examines the broader political and regulatory context in which healthcare oversight decisions are made.)

By Bud Shaver

Albuquerque, New Mexico — New Mexico currently has zero Republican representation in the United States Congress, leaving millions of residents without a single federal advocate willing to challenge entrenched corruption, demand accountability, or defend basic safeguards in matters involving human life, public health, elections, and the rule of law.

This absence of representation did not occur organically. It followed the enactment of partisan congressional redistricting maps that dismantled New Mexico’s only Republican-held district, effectively engineering a one-party congressional delegation. Through redistricting, communities with distinct political, cultural, and regional identities were divided and absorbed into heavily Democratic districts, ensuring the elimination of meaningful opposition representation at the federal level.
​
The result is a state delegation entirely insulated from dissent — and a population stripped of political recourse in Washington.

With one-party control now consolidated across the legislature, executive offices, judiciary, regulatory agencies, and congressional delegation, New Mexico has become a national outlier — a state where abortion is effectively unregulated, election verification does not require proof of citizenship or residency, and even congressional criminal referrals involving aborted baby body parts have been rejected without prosecution.

Abortion Free New Mexico (AFNM) is calling on Senate Republican Leader John Thune and the broader Republican delegation to act decisively by advancing the SAVE Act, ending the filibuster if necessary, and restoring transparency, verification, and enforcement mechanisms that New Mexico has systematically weakened and dismantled.

“New Mexico is what happens when ideology replaces law,” said Tara Shaver, spokeswoman for Abortion Free New Mexico.“Oversight disappears, enforcement collapses, and powerful interests are protected while women, children, and the public are left unprotected.”

Federal Lawsuit Over Election Rolls Highlights Accountability Crisis

Adding to New Mexico’s collapse in accountability, the U.S. Department of Justice — under the Trump administration — has filed federal lawsuits against New Mexico and other states seeking to compel the disclosure of complete, unredacted statewide voter registration rolls, including names, dates of birth, addresses, and driver’s license or Social Security information, which the DOJ argues are required under federal election laws. 

New Mexico officials have resisted the demand for full voter data, citing state privacy statutes and constitutional authority over election administration.

• New Mexico resists federal demand for voter data​

“When a state refuses to allow verification of its own voter rolls and is then sued by the federal government over it, that confirms what many citizens already know — the rule of law in New Mexico is no longer consistent or transparent,” Shaver said.

Complaints Filed — Accountability Removed

For more than a decade, Abortion Free New Mexico and its leadership have filed formal complaints, sworn statements, and public records requests with state agencies including the New Mexico Nursing Board and the Environment Department, documenting:

• Allegations that non-physicians performed abortion procedures
• Abortion-related injuries requiring emergency medical care
• Unsafe clinic conditions and improper handling of aborted babies remains as biohazard waste
• Failures in informed consent, especially involving minors and out-of-state patients

Despite these filings, no meaningful enforcement actions followed. No licenses revoked. No comprehensive investigations. No public accountability.

“We documented violations. We filed complaints. We followed the process,” Shaver said. “And instead of enforcing the law, the state chose to eliminate it.”

Legislature Repealed Criminal Abortion Law After Complaints Were Filed

In 2021, following years of documented complaints, the New Mexico Legislature repealed the state’s 1969 criminal abortion statute, eliminating criminal penalties and one of the last statutory guardrails governing abortion.

After repeal, abortion in New Mexico became governed almost entirely through administrative rules — without criminal enforcement mechanisms and without clear statutory physician-only requirements, unless enforced by agencies that have repeatedly declined to act.

“Rather than respond to evidence with oversight, lawmakers removed the law itself,” Shaver said. “That repeal sent a clear message: abortion providers would be shielded, not scrutinized.”

Congressional Findings: Trafficking and Research Using Aborted Baby Body Parts

​The accountability collapse deepened when the New Mexico Attorney General declined to pursue a criminal referralfrom the U.S. House Select Panel on Infant Lives.
Following a multi-year investigation involving subpoenas, sworn testimony, internal documents, and financial records, the congressional panel referred Southwestern Women’s Options (SWO) — the nation’s largest late-term abortion facility — and the University of New Mexico (UNM) for potential criminal violations related to the procurement, transfer, and research use of aborted fetal body parts.

According to the panel’s findings, documents indicated:

• Aborted babies’ organs and tissue were transferred from SWO to UNM
• UNM researchers used aborted baby body parts for experimentation and research
• Whole brains from aborted babies were admittedly used for dissection by “summer camp” students.
• Financial and logistical arrangements raised concerns about illegal trafficking and prohibited transactions
• The primary goal of UNM’s partnership with Southwestern Women’s Options was to increase the volume of second trimester abortions, in order to provide the UNM Health Sciences Center with an ample supply of aborted infant remains for “research” and other purposes.
• The Select Investigative Panel agreed with Shaver’s conclusions that New Mexico’s Spradling Act was violated.

​Despite the federal referral, the New Mexico Attorney General rejected the case, and no prosecution or enforcement action followed.

“There will never be justice in New Mexico until leaders, lawmakers, and law enforcement officials stop propping up a failing abortion industry whose grisly trade harms the most vulnerable members of our communities,” said Tara Shaver, spokeswoman for Abortion Free New Mexico. “When Congress refers credible evidence of trafficking and experimentation using aborted children and the state refuses to act, that is not discretion — it is protection.”

Weak Election Safeguards and Collapse of the Rule of Law

AFNM warns that the same political culture protecting the abortion industry has also weakened election safeguards.
​
Under current New Mexico law, voters are not required to present documentary proof of U.S. citizenship or proof of residency when registering, relying instead on self-attestation. In parallel, New Mexico has adopted policies allowing non-U.S. citizens — including individuals without lawful immigration status — to obtain licenses to practice law, following a rule change by the New Mexico Supreme Court.

“When citizenship, elections, medical oversight, and criminal enforcement are all treated as optional, the rule of law collapses,” Shaver said.

Call for Immediate Senate Action

Abortion Free New Mexico emphasizes that New Mexico cannot reform itself internally after intentional redistricting eliminated the state’s only Republican seat in Congress, leaving millions of residents without meaningful federal representation and no internal check on one-party power.

“The U.S. Senate must act because New Mexico was deliberately stripped of representation,” Shaver concluded. “This did not happen by accident. Congressional maps were intentionally redrawn to erase opposition, silence dissent, and lock in one-party control. New Mexico has no Republican voice in Congress by design, and when representation is engineered out of existence, accountability follows it out the door. That is why the rest of the Senate has a responsibility to intervene. End the filibuster if necessary. Pass the SAVE Act. Restore verification, accountability, and the rule of law. This is not a procedural debate — it is a national emergency with life-and-death consequences.”

Abortion Free New Mexico is urging federal lawmakers to recognize New Mexico not as an exception, but as a warning— and to act now to restore transparency, verification, accountability, and justice.

For documentation, congressional records, public filings, and investigative reports, visit AbortionFreeNM.com.

By Bud Shaver,​

Albuquerque, New Mexico — Abortion Free New Mexico (AFNM) is sounding the alarm as abortion tourism into New Mexico reaches unprecedented levels, driven in large part by Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham and other state leaders who have aggressively expanded abortion access while dismantlingsafeguards, oversight, and accountability.As a result, New Mexico has become a national destination for unregulated, high-volume abortions, drawing women and minors from across the country—often without parental knowledge, without medical transparency, and without any meaningful state monitoring to ensure patient safety.A Crisis of OversightNew Mexico is now the only state in the region where abortion facilities:

• Receive no regular health or safety inspections
• Operate with no state licensing requirements
• Are not required to report abortion complications, minors served, or follow-up care

This regulatory vacuum has created what Abortion Free New Mexico describes as a public safety and human rights crisis.More Than 50 Documented Abortion Injuries — Including One DeathSince 2010, Abortion Free New Mexico has documented more than 50 abortion-related injuries, including one confirmed patient death, using 911 records, eyewitness testimony, and confidential informants.

Documented injuries include:

• Hemorrhage requiring emergency transport
• Uterine perforation
• Respiratory distress under sedation
• Sepsis
• Incomplete abortions requiring emergency surgery
• A fatal late-term abortion complication

The most recent documented abortion-related injury occurred on September 14, 2025, involving a Texas woman injured at a New Mexico Planned Parenthood facility.

• Details of that incident are available here: https://www.abortionfreenm.com/news/state-of-emergency-texas-woman-injured-at-new-mexico-planned-parenthood

A full list of documented cases and highlights is available at:

https://www.abortionfreenm.com/abortion-risks.html

AFNM emphasizes that these cases represent only the injuries that can be independently verified, as New Mexico collects no official data on abortion complications.Minors Receiving Abortions Without Parental NotificationNew Mexico law allows minors from any state to undergo abortions—including late-term procedures–without parental notification or involvement.

Combined with abortion tourism, this policy has resulted in:

• Transport of minors across state lines
• Medical procedures performed in secrecy
• No legal, medical, or ethical accountability
• No mandatory reporting of potential sexual abuse

AFNM Calls for Immediate Action​Abortion Free New Mexico is calling for:

• A federal investigation into New Mexico’s abortion industry
• Congressional review of interstate abortion trafficking
• Mandatory parental involvement protections
• National abortion complication reporting requirements
• Mandatory licensing and inspections of abortion facilities
• Criminal investigations of facilities that endanger women or minors

Tara Shaver, spokeswoman for Abortion Free New Mexico, issued the following statement:

New Mexico has become the nation’s unregulated abortion haven, and the result has been a trail of injured women, exploited minors, and a state government that refuses to acknowledge the crisis it created. Abortion tourism is not compassion—it’s a pipeline funneling vulnerable women and girls into facilities that operate without oversight, without inspections, and without consequences. New Mexicans deserve better, and the women brought here from across the country deserve protection, not political exploitation.”

She added:

New Mexico has become a magnet for dangerous, unregulated abortion practices—because the system was intentionally built that way. Women are being injured, trafficked across state lines, and left with life-threatening complications while the clinics responsible face zero accountability. This is a political crisis, a medical crisis, and a human rights crisis wrapped into one.”

FULL SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
ABORTION FREE NEW MEXICO — ABORTION TOURISM & SAFETY CRISIS DATA SHEET.

​I. Abortion Tourism Surge

• New Mexico clinics report 70%+ of patients from out of state.
• Women—including minors—are flown or driven into New Mexico for abortions because:
  • No parental consent laws
  • No safety standards
  • No reporting requirements
  • No oversight of travel, housing, or follow-up care

This has created a cross-country abortion pipeline with zero accountability.

II. National Abortion Travel Networks Using New Mexico

Publicly documented networks directing women and minors into NM include:

• The National Abortion Federation
• Indigenous Women Rising
• Planned Parenthood Federation of America
• The Brigid Alliance
• Multiple abortion funds coordinating multi-state travel

III. State Oversight: Nonexistent

New Mexico provides less oversight to abortion facilities than to nail salons, a tattoo parlor, veterinarian office, or restaurant kitchen. 

The state imposes:
❌ No inspections
❌ No facility licensing
❌ No standards of care
❌ No complication reporting
❌ No parental notification
❌ No tracking of minors
❌ No consequences for botched abortions​

New Mexico is an intentional sanctuary for unregulated abortion providers.

IV. 50+ Documented Abortion Injuries (2010–Present)

These include:

• Catastrophic bleeding
• Uterine perforation
• Sepsis
• Respiratory distress
• Failed abortions requiring emergency surgery
• One patient death

All verified through:

• 911 emergency records
• Insider information
• Eyewitness testimony

View the full list and injury summaries:
https://www.abortionfreenm.com/abortion-risks.html

Not one injury resulted in a state inspection.

V. Minors in New Mexico Abortion Clinics

New Mexico is a national destination for hiding abortions from parents.

The state allows AND PROMOTES:

• Abortions on minors of any age
• No parental notification
• No consent
• No reporting of sexual abuse
• No verification of who brings a minor across state lines
• No follow-up care requirements

​This is a legal black hole that endangers children and conceals abuse.

VI. How State Leaders Fuel the Crisis

Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham and key state leaders have:

• Removed barriers to abortion at every stage.
• Publicly encouraged out-of-state abortion travel.
• Funded abortion clinic infrastructure.
• Blocked local governments from enacting safety ordinances.
• Refused to investigate any abortion-related injury or death.

VII. AFNM Recommendations 

• Federal investigation into New Mexico’s abortion industry
• Congressional review of interstate abortion trafficking
• Mandatory parental involvement protections
• National complication reporting requirements
• Mandatory licensing & inspection
• Criminal investigation of facilities that endanger women or minors

Southwestern Women’s Options, UNM, Planned Parenthood, and Whole Woman’s Health operate in New Mexico without a single state inspection. Women have been injured- with one confirmed patient DEATH, minors have been transported, and leaders like Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham pretend nothing is happening.​
This is a manufactured crisis—and we’re exposing every part of it.”
— Tara Shaver, Abortion Free New Mexico

By Bud Shaver,

​Albuquerque, New Mexico — Abortion Free New Mexico (AFNM) is sounding an urgent national alarm, revealing that New Mexico has rapidly become the nation’s primary destination for unregulated, high-volume abortion practices. With virtually no oversight, the state has evolved into what AFNM describes as “a national hub for abortion tourism and an unchecked pipeline for out-of-state abortion businesses.”

Abortion Free New Mexico, the organization that first brought widespread attention to the issue of “abortion tourism” in the state, has played a central role in popularizing the term through its investigative reports, media statements, and statewide public-awareness campaigns. AFNM’s extensive documentation shows a dramatic influx of women and minors being transported into New Mexico from several other states for procedures that are restricted, regulated, or prohibited elsewhere.

“New Mexico has become a refuge not for women, but for the abortion industry itself. With zero accountability and virtually no reporting requirements, abortion businesses have flooded into this state because they know they will never be questioned, never investigated, and never held to even the most basic medical standards. New Mexico has become a magnet for out-of-state abortion businesses and a pipeline for minors and vulnerable women being brought here for procedures that would be restricted or illegal in their own states,” said Tara Shaver, spokeswoman for Abortion Free New Mexico. 

In 2024–2025, AFNM published multiple in-depth reports detailing the rapid expansion of out-of-state abortion providers relocating to New Mexico, the growing dominance of mail-order chemical abortions, and the influx of women transported here by activist funding networks.

AFNM’s 2024–2025 research highlights:

• A dramatic rise in out-of-state clinics relocating to New Mexico to escape regulatory scrutiny.
• Heavy reliance on mail-order chemical abortions, often without in-person exams, ultrasounds, or follow-up care.
• A growing ecosystem of activist-funded travel networks transporting women — including minors — hundreds of miles across state lines.
• A near-total lack of state oversight, allowing abortion centers to operate with a level of secrecy unmatched anywhere else in the country.

AFNM’s marquee 2025 billboard campaign brought national attention to the practice, reaching thousands of women crossing into the state and exposing what AFNM calls “a manufactured abortion pipeline disguised as healthcare.”

“This is not healthcare — it is exploitation.”

AFNM is calling on federal and state leaders to take immediate action by launching a comprehensive review of New Mexico’s abortion industry, including:

• Interstate transport of minors and potential violations of parental rights
• Third-party funding and coordination networks that organize cross-state abortion travel
• Absence of data reporting, safety standards, and post-procedure accountability
• Oversight of out-of-state abortion businesses operating in New Mexico

“New Mexico has become the nation’s abortion destination by design, not by accident,” said Shaver. “We are calling for urgent federal review to protect women, safeguard minors, and ensure accountability for clinics operating without proper oversight.”

About Abortion Free New Mexico

Abortion Free New Mexico (AFNM) is a pro-life research and advocacy organization committed to promoting accountability within the abortion industry and advancing policies that protect women, minors, and the unborn.

By Bud Shaver,​

Albuquerque, New Mexico — New Mexico has rapidly become a national hub for out-of-state abortions. This trend is not driven by local demand, but by an expanding network of wealthy donors, Hollywood celebrities, and billionaire-backed foundations that are actively financing travel, lodging, and abortion procedures for women—primarily from Texas and other states with protective pro-life laws.

Through large charitable gifts, public fundraising campaigns, and entertainment-driven activism, these high-profile figures are fueling a pipeline that moves women across state lines into New Mexico abortion facilities. Their financial support empowers national abortion funds that specialize in arranging flights, hotels, rideshares, meals, childcare, and multi-state logistics for abortion travel.

The result is a well-funded, celebrity-endorsed abortion-travel industry that has turned New Mexico into a national destination for late-term and elective abortions, with minimal oversight or reporting requirements.Celebrities Actively Fundraising for Abortion Travel
​Several entertainment figures have used their platforms, concerts, merchandise sales, and publicity campaigns to financially support abortion funds that provide interstate travel—funds that frequently route clients to New Mexico.​

Top Celebrity Fundraisers & Donors

• Olivia Rodrigo – Directed tour proceeds to the National Network of Abortion Funds (NNAF), which covers abortion-related travel nationwide.
• Phoebe Bridgers – Fundraised for The Brigid Alliance, one of the most active travel-focused abortion funds in the U.S.
• Maggie Rogers – Partnered with Bridgers on high-dollar music releases benefiting abortion-travel organizations.
• Amy Schumer – Regularly promotes and fundraises for organizations like Brigid Alliance and WRRAP, both of which assist with multi-state abortion logistics.
• Busy Philipps – Public advocate who raises awareness and funding for national abortion-access organizations that help transport women into permissive states like New Mexico.
• Lucy Dacus – Directs concert and merchandise proceeds toward abortion funds, including those supporting women leaving Texas.
• Mark Ruffalo – Supports organizations such as Noise For Now and participates in high-profile awareness campaigns, helping direct resources to abortion travel assistance, including for New Mexico.
• Jennifer Lawrence – Uses her public platform to fundraise and advocate for Planned Parenthood and other reproductive justice organizations, increasing funding that supports out-of-state abortion access.

Impact: These celebrity-driven fundraising efforts mobilize millions of followers and generate substantial donations, dramatically expanding the ability of abortion funds to pay for travel to states like New Mexico.

“It is deeply concerning that celebrities are using their fame to funnel resources and attention toward abortion travel. Their influence not only normalizes abortion but actively encourages women to leave their home states to access procedures in New Mexico, putting vulnerable communities at risk,” stated Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico.

Billionaires & High-Net-Worth Philanthropists Funding Abortion Access
​Several large-scale donors and philanthropic foundations contribute tens of millions of dollars annually to abortion-access organizations. These funds often support the same networks that coordinate travel to New Mexico.

Major Financial Backers

• MacKenzie Scott – Has given massive unrestricted donations to organizations like Planned Parenthood and Guttmacher Institute, strengthening national abortion infrastructure.
• Michael Bloomberg / Bloomberg Philanthropies – Longstanding major donor to abortion-rights groups and policy networks.
• Melinda French Gates (Pivotal Ventures) – Announced multi-hundred-million-dollar commitments to women’s issues, including organizations that defend and expand abortion access.
• Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation – Historically the largest single funder of abortion-related initiatives in the United States, deeply embedded in the national pro-abortion ecosystem.
• Soros-aligned philanthropic networks – Provide significant grants to pro-abortion legal, political, and service organizations that strengthen state-level access hubs.

Impact: These donors supply the financial backbone for the abortion-access movement—funding litigation, clinics, national coordination, and the travel-assistance infrastructure that brings out-of-state women into New Mexico.

How Their Money Directly Impacts New Mexico
​New Mexico’s permissive abortion laws, lack of parental notification, late-term procedures, and minimal state data reporting make it the primary recipient of out-of-state abortion travel from the Southwest.
Abortion funds benefiting from celebrity and billionaire cash:

• Pay for flights into Albuquerque, Santa Fe, and El Paso/Southern NM corridors
• Cover hotel stays and rideshare services
• Coordinate multi-state bus, train, or flight chains
• Provide childcare, food, and lost-wage assistance
• Arrange accompaniment teams for minors and vulnerable women

This infrastructure allows abortion-seeking networks to bypass state protections, enabling abortions that would otherwise be illegal or heavily regulated in donor-restricted states such as Texas.

Tara Shaver, spokesperson for Abortion Free New Mexico, released this statement:

“What we are witnessing is a disturbing trend: wealthy elites, celebrities, and billionaires using their fortunes to turn New Mexico into the nation’s abortion playground. These powerful outsiders are not helping women—they are exploiting them. By funding abortion tourism, they are drawing vulnerable mothers away from their families, communities, and support networks, pushing them toward an irreversible decision.
​
New Mexico is being targeted because we have virtually no protections for women or their unborn children, and these donors know it. Abortion Free New Mexico stands firmly against this predatory system, and we are committed to exposing the financial networks that profit from human tragedy.”

Conclusion

Celebrity-backed fundraising and billionaire philanthropy have supercharged the abortion-access movement, enabling aggressive national efforts to transport women—especially from Texas—into New Mexico for abortions.
​
This emerging abortion-tourism pipeline is not grassroots or community-driven; it is orchestrated by high-dollar donors with political motives and the organizational capacity to further transform New Mexico into a centralized hub for abortion on demand.

Abortion Free New Mexico will continue to document these networks, challenge their influence, and advocate for transparency, accountability, and life-affirming alternatives for women in crisis.

RELATED REPORT: 

• OUT-OF-STATE ABORTIONS SURGE IN NEW MEXICO DRIVEN BY TEXAS AND NATIONAL FUNDS

About Abortion Free New Mexico

Abortion Free New Mexico works to expose and end the abortion industry in New Mexico through investigations, advocacy, and public awareness. The organization has launched a billboard campaign to help counter out-of-state abortions and has a team that compassionately reaches out to abortion-minded women at Albuquerque abortion centers to offer support and help them choose life.

By Bud Shaver,

Albuquerque, New Mexico — New research shows that national abortion funds, Texas-based nonprofits, and affiliated organizations are dramatically expanding their travel, lodging, and logistical grants to bring out-of-state abortion seekers into New Mexico, raising significant concerns among Abortion Free New Mexico leaders about the state becoming a national hub for abortion-on-demand.

Out-of-State Abortion Surge ContinuesMore than 14,000 Texans traveled to New Mexico in 2023 to obtain abortions, and an estimated 71% of all abortions in the state are now performed on women who do not live in New Mexico. This massive influx has transformed the state into what Abortion Free New Mexico leaders describe as an “abortion tourism pipeline.”

The Guttmacher Institute reports that although total numbers dipped slightly in 2024, 12,700 non-residents still traveled to New Mexico for abortions—one of the highest rates in the nation.

National Groups Financing Abortion Travel to New MexicoSeveral national and multi-state abortion funds have increased or restructured their budgets to prioritize long-distance travel to states like New Mexico, where abortion remains legal until birth.

The Brigid Alliance

• Pays for airfare, hotel stays, meals, childcare, and ground transportation.
• Reports an average $2,300 per client travel itinerary.
• Increased meal stipends (from $40/day to $75/day) to better fund long-distance travel.
• Serves a growing share of clients routed to New Mexico for late-term abortions.

National Network of Abortion Funds (NNAF)

• Reports a 39% surge in requests following the Dobbs decision.
• Distributed nearly $37 million nationwide in one year, including $10+ million specifically for practical support such as travel and lodging.
• Prioritizes funding pipelines to “unrestricted states” like New Mexico.

Tubman Travel Project

• Receives major grants (including a $250,000 award) to support facilitated “group travel accompaniment” for Texans heading to New Mexico.
• Provides emotional support, lodging, and coordinated transportation.

Mariposa Fund (New Mexico)

• Focuses on undocumented individuals seeking abortion.
• Provides gas cards, travel coordination, and partnership support with larger national abortion funds.

Texas-Based Groups Driving Travel to New MexicoSeveral Texas nonprofits exist exclusively to help Texas women travel out-of-state for abortions, including New Mexico:

Fund Texas Choice

• Covers airfare, lodging, meals, and ground transportation.

Texas Tubman Travel Initiative

• Coordinates flights, hotels, recovery accommodations, and guided travel accompaniment.
• Has helped 400+ Texas women travel to New Mexico.

Texas Equal Access Fund (TEA Fund)

• Provides financial assistance for travel and related expenses to out-of-state abortion clinics.

Lilith Fund

• Supports Texas women traveling out-of-state, explicitly including New Mexico.

Additional Texas Organizations Providing Abortion FundingMany partner with national networks that route women into New Mexico’s abortion industry.

Frontera Fund (Rio Grande Valley, TX)

• Provides financial assistance for procedures.
• Covers travel for Texans forced to seek out-of-state abortions.
• Frequently used by women in South Texas traveling to New Mexico for later-term procedures.

Jane’s Due Process (Texas)

• Helps Texas minors obtain judicial bypass.
• Funds and coordinates out-of-state travel for pregnant teens without parental involvement.
• A primary facilitator of underage abortion travel to New Mexico.

Stigma Relief Fund (Texas)

• Provides grants to offset abortion procedure costs at clinics like Alamo Women’s.
• Partners with other funds that cover transportation and lodging.

SYS – Support Your Sistah (Texas)

• Supports women of color and low-income Texans seeking abortion services.
• Helps fund out-of-state procedures and collaborates with national travel networks.

The Bridge Collective (Austin, TX)

• Offers transportation and practical support for Texans seeking abortion.
• Former rideshare network now assisting with interstate travel, including to New Mexico.

These organizations often operate independently from national funds but frequently coordinate with them to maintain a streamlined interstate abortion-travel system.

New Infrastructure to Support Abortion Tourism
​
​Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains has launched 

“Gloria,” an Airbnb-style housing platform matching abortion travelers with free lodging during their stay in New Mexico.

Abortion Free New Mexico leaders say this cements an interstate abortion pipeline funded by national and Texas-based groups.

Tara Shaver, spokesperson for Abortion Free New Mexico, released this statement:

“The sheer scale of national and Texas-based funding pouring into New Mexico is alarming. We are witnessing a coordinated, multi-million-dollar effort to fly women—many of them vulnerable and in crisis—across state lines into an industry that profits from ending innocent lives. New Mexico is being targeted and exploited as the abortion capital of the United States. This is not compassion, and it is certainly not healthcare. It is a tragic abuse of women and an assault on our communities. New Mexico must not be used as a dumping ground for abortions that other states have rightly rejected.”

Growing Ethical and Community Concerns

From a pro-life perspective, this expanding network raises several concerns:

• The normalization of donor-funded “abortion tourism.”
• Heavy strain on New Mexico communities as out-of-state abortions dominate statewide totals.
• Creation of a permanent abortion-travel industry with housing networks, travel brokers, and paid coordinators.
• Moral concerns as millions are spent not to support mothers or families but to streamline pregnancy termination.

About Abortion Free New Mexico
​
Abortion Free New Mexico works to expose and end the abortion industry in New Mexico through investigations, advocacy, and public awareness. The organization has launched a billboard campaign to help counter out-of-state abortions and has a team that compassionately reaches out to abortion-minded women at Albuquerque abortion centers to offer support and help them choose life.