New Mexico Democrat Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham banned people from being able to carry guns in Albuquerque and the surrounding county for at least the next 30 days after a kid was killed during a road rage incident.

Grisham signed an executive order on Thursday declaring that gun violence was a public health emergency in the Democrat-controlled state.

On Friday, Grisham unilaterally suspended open and concealed carry laws in Albuquerque and the surrounding area. She said that she could further lengthen or renew her order — which was immediately slammed by many as being unconstitutional.

Grisham effectively admitted that her order might be unconstitutional when she conceded that she might not win legal challenges filed against the order.

“Now I am sure as I go through the rest of this, there will be a lot of questions about whether or not we think we have the legal right to do that. I am sure that before you write this, there will be a legal challenge,” she said. “And I can’t tell you that we win it given all of the different challenges to gun violence laws and restrictions on individual firearm access and control.”

WATCH: New Mexico’s Democrat Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham admits she is violating the constitution by suspending the right to carry a gun:

"There will be a legal challenge and I can't tell you that we win it"

Her actions are utterly disgraceful.
pic.twitter.com/clLnW3uX5Q

— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) September 9, 2023

She was later challenged directly over whether her decision to unilaterally override laws was unconstitutional.

Grisham responded that her decision to declare an emergency gives her “additional powers.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP

“No constitutional right, in my view, including my oath, is intended to be absolute,” she said. “There are restrictions on free speech, there are restrictions on my freedoms.”

Grisham then spoke about the 11-year-old who was killed this week and others who have been killed in shootings.

“But wait a minute, you’re talking about crimes,” the reporter pushed back. “There are already laws against the crime. So how are their rights [inaudible] –?”

“But again, if I’m unsafe, who’s standing up for that right?” Grisham responded. “If this climate is so out of control, somebody should do something. I’m doing as much as I know to do.”

She was asked by a different reporter: “Do you really think that criminals are going to hear this message and not carry a gun in Albuquerque on the streets for 30 days?”

“Uhhh, no,” she answered.

WATCH: New Mexico’s Democrat Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham shreds the Constitution while trying to strip her constituents ability to carry firearms.

pic.twitter.com/UghVrZb6A2

— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) September 9, 2023

A federal appeals court ruled against Mississippi’s permanent voting ban for certain felons, going against Supreme Court precedent in doing so.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last month that the Mississippi Constitution’s lifetime voting ban for felons convicted of certain crimes violates the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The Mississippi Constitution revokes an individual’s right to vote permanently if they receive a felony conviction for crimes including arson, bigamy, bribery, embezzlement, forgery, murder, obtaining money or goods under false pretense, perjury, rape, or theft, as well as those crimes the Mississippi attorney general determines fall under those explicit categories, such as armed robbery and timber larceny.

The case decided on by the court last month, Hopkins v. Hosemann, was initiated by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and the law firm Simpson Thatcher & Bartlett in 2018.

Judge James Dennis ruled that Mississippi’s continuation of its lifetime ban on certain felons went against progress by “bucking a clear and consistent trend” in the country modeled by the 35 states and the District of Columbia that gave up permanent felon voting bans over the years.

Dennis further declared that Mississippi’s permanent ban “serves no legitimate penological purpose” and thwarts proper rehabilitation.

“By severing former offenders from the body politic forever, [Mississippi] ensures that they will never be fully rehabilitated, continues to punish them beyond the term their culpability requires, and serves no protective function to society,” stated Dennis. “It is thus a cruel and unusual punishment.”

Judge Edith Jones countered in a dissenting opinion that the majority ruling itself contradicted the Constitution and reflected judicial activism.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP

Section Two of the Fourteenth Amendment allows states to deprive citizens of the right to vote for either “participation in rebellion, or other crime.” Jones declared that this provision expressly allows for lifetime voting bans for felons.

“The carve-out reflects a long tradition in this country, and before that, in British law, and before that, in the Western world,” said Jones. “This tradition can be summed up in Lockean terms: if a person breaks a law, he has forfeited the right to participate in making them.”

Jones also cited the Supreme Court precedent set in the 1974 case Richardson v. Ramirez, which determined that felon voting bans don’t violate the Equal Protection Clause. In that case, the court ruled that the question of handling voting rights for felons should be hashed out in a legislative forum, and that it wasn’t for their court to “choose one set of values over another.”

“[G]o and convince the state legislatures. Do the hard work of persuading your fellow citizens that the law should change,” said Jones. “[T]he court turns that advice on its head. No need to change the law through a laborious political process. The court will do it for you, so long as you rely on the Due Process Clause, rather than the Equal Protection Clause.”

The five felons who sued for the right to vote were Dennis Hopkins, Herman Parker, Walter Wayne Kuhn Jr, Bryon Demond Coleman, Jon O’Neal, and Earnest Willhite. Hopkins, Parker, Kuhn, and Willhite were convicted of grand larceny; Coleman was convicted of receiving stolen property; and O’Neal was convicted of second degree arson. All have completed their sentences.

Mississippi does offer a slim chance for voting rights restoration: the legislature may pass a bill to restore a particular individual’s voting rights, referred to as a “suffrage bill.”

In response to the ruling, Mississippi requested an en banc rehearing. Court of appeals hearings normally consist of three justices; with this request, all justices of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals would hear the case.