H. 63 Would Prohibit Breed-Specific Laws in New Mexico
New Mexico’s H. 63, which would prohibit municipalities and counties from passing breed-specific laws (BSL) in the state of New Mexico, has cleared the House. If you live in New Mexico, please keep supporting this legislation, and thank sponsor Representative Yvette Herrell for sponsoring and advancing this bill.
H. 63‘s amendment language states that,
“Municipalities, including home rule municipalities, and counties shall not regulate by ordinance or rule or in any other manner regulate dangerous dogs in a manner that is specific to breed.” (Emphasis mine.)
Notice that Representative Herrell’s bill would prohibit the invocation of ‘home rule’ as a reason to pass BSL, meaning that since there has been no proof offered that that non-existent “breed” “pit bull” represents a danger to the public, cities and counties could not invoke their ‘home rule’ status and therefore the so-called “rational” basis — i.e. public health, welfare, and safety — to end around the Constitution. And yes, home rule or not, breed-specific laws are unconstitutional.
Related Posts By Category
- Nevada’s AB 110 Would Prohibit Breed-Specific Laws within the State, BUT…
- Utah’s HB 97 Would Prohibit Breed-Specific Legislation in the State
- Missouri HB 1116 Would Prohibit Breed-Specific Legislation Within the State
- Washington State Considers HB 2117 to Prohibit Breed-Specific Legislation
- Connecticut HB 6311 Would Prohibit Breed-Specific Legislation Statewide