Opinion ID: 733385
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: State ex. rel. Clark v. Johnson, 904 P.2d 11 (N.M.1995)

Text: 16 On July 13, 1995, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled that Governor Johnson lacked the authority to sign the compacts on behalf of the state. State ex. rel. Clark v. Johnson, 120 N.M. 562, 904 P.2d 11, 24 (1995). The Supreme Court also held that the compact[s] and agreement[s] authorize[ ] more forms of gaming than New Mexico law permits under any set of circumstances. Id. 904 P.2d at 21. The court reached its conclusion about the Governor's authority by examining both the state constitution and any relevant state statutory authority. It held that neither source conferred upon Governor Johnson the authority to enter into the compacts. 17 With respect to the New Mexico constitution and the doctrine of separation of powers, the court held that the constitution mandates that it is the Legislature that creates the law, and the Governor's proper role is the execution of the laws. Id. at 22. Thus, [i]f the entry into the compacts reasonably can be viewed as the execution of law, we would have no difficulty recognizing the attempt as within the Governor's authority as the State's chief executive officer. Id. However, if entry into the compacts in fact conflict[s] with or infringe[s] upon what is the essence of legislative authority--the making of law, the Governor exceeded his authority. Id. 18 In examining the effect of the Governor's entry into the compacts, the court concluded that the compacts preclude future legislative action and foreclose[ ] inconsistent legislative action because they give the Tribe[s] a virtually irrevocable and seemingly perpetual right to conduct any form of Class III gaming permitted in New Mexico on the date the Governor signed the agreement. Id. at 23. Furthermore, the court concluded that the Governor's entry into the compacts disrupted legislative authority because the compact strikes a detailed and specific balance between the respective roles of the State and the Tribe in such important matters as the regulation of Class III gaming activities, the licensing of its operators, and the respective civil and criminal jurisdictions of the State and the Tribe necessary for the enforcement of state or tribal laws or regulations. Id. The New Mexico Supreme Court also held that, by entering into compacts which authorized the Tribes to engage in all forms of casino-style games, the Governor contravened the legislature's expressed aversion to commercial gambling. Id. at 24. 19 The court found further support for its conclusion by observing that, historically, every other compact entered into between New Mexico and other sovereign entities was accomplished through legislative enactment, which the Governor simply approved or vetoed. The court concluded these gaming compacts with Indian tribes should be handled the same way. 20 The New Mexico court then considered whether any statutory authority supported the Governor's unilateral entry into the gaming compacts, and concluded that neither the Joint Powers Agreements Act, N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 11-1-1 to -7, nor the Mutual Aid Act, N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 29-8-1 to -3 authorized the compacts. 7 21