<![CDATA[ABORTION FREE NEW MEXICO

<![CDATA[ABORTION FREE NEW MEXICO - News]]>Wed, 04 Mar 2026 15:10:15 -0800Weebly<![CDATA[FROM SIDEWALK RESCUES TO DOJ COMPLAINTS: PRO-LIFE GROUP EXPANDS PRESSURE ON NEW MEXICO ABORTION INDUSTRY]]>Wed, 04 Mar 2026 12:38:17 GMThttps://www.abortionfreenm.com/news/from-sidewalk-rescues-to-doj-complaints-pro-life-group-expands-pressure-on-new-mexico-abortion-industry

A newborn’s story reveals the mission driving Abortion Free New Mexico’s comprehensive efforts for life.

By Bud Shaver,

Albuquerque, New Mexico -- The birth of a baby boy this month is highlighting both the life-saving work of sidewalk outreach and the broader debate over New Mexico’s growing role as a regional abortion destination.

The child, Nathan, was born March 2 after his mother encountered volunteers from an Abortion Free New Mexico (AFNM) sidewalk outreach team outside a New Mexico abortion facility late last year.

At the time, she was 24 weeks pregnant.

The couple spoke only Spanish, creating an immediate language barrier.

Using Google Translate, practical support, and compassionate conversation, volunteers were able to communicate with the mother and offer encouragement and resources. Despite difficult circumstances, she ultimately chose life.

Nathan was born healthy.

His name means “Gift of God.”

For AFNM leaders, the story reflects the core mission that has guided the organization’s work across New Mexico — saving lives.

A Mission Centered on Saving Lives

While Abortion Free New Mexico has increasingly become known for its investigative work, legislative testimony, and public accountability efforts, leaders say those initiatives have always existed to support the organization’s original mission: reaching mothers and saving lives.

Unlike many national organizations that focus primarily on a single strategy, AFNM says its approach has always involved multiple efforts working together — including sidewalk outreach, prayer, investigative research, legislative engagement, and public education.

The organization also emphasizes cooperation across the broader pro-life movement.

“There is a place for everyone in the pro-life movement,” said Tara Shaver, spokesperson for Abortion Free New Mexico.

“While not every group approaches the work the same way, from our end we are committed to as much unity as possible among those working to defend life. We don’t believe there is one silver bullet that will end abortion in New Mexico. Real change will come through many different efforts working together — from helping mothers directly to ultimately achieving the political solutions many other states have already reached.”

Nathan’s story represents the kind of life-saving moment those diverse efforts are ultimately meant to make possible.

New Mexico Becoming a Regional Abortion Destination

Nathan’s story also highlights a broader trend AFNM says has emerged in recent years, with New Mexico becoming a regional destination for abortion as women increasingly travel from surrounding states seeking procedures.

Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision overturning Roe v. Wade, abortion travel into New Mexico has increased significantly as the state maintained some of the most permissive abortion policies in the region.

According to a Guttmacher Institute provider survey, an estimated 21,000 abortions occurred in New Mexico in 2023 — a dramatic increase widely attributed to out-of-state abortion travel.

AFNM has been among the most vocal organizations documenting what it describes as “abortion tourism” flowing into New Mexico, a term the organization helped bring into national focus as abortion travel into the state increased dramatically after Roe v. Wade was overturned.

The organization has repeatedly published reports and graphics highlighting the trend, and recently launched a three-billboard interstate campaign in Texas aimed at countering efforts promoting New Mexico as a destination for abortion. The campaign also responds to pro-abortion billboards in New Mexico celebrating expanded abortion access in the state.

AFNM leaders Bud and Tara Shaver originally moved to New Mexico more than a decade ago to investigate and expose the state’s role as a destination for late-term abortion procedures, a reality that led them to publicly describe New Mexico as the “Late-Term Abortion Capital.” Their work documenting late-term abortion practices helped bring national attention to the issue and contributed to the organization’s growing prominence within the broader pro-life movement.

Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, AFNM leaders say the dynamic has expanded significantly, with women now traveling to New Mexico for abortions at all stages of pregnancy, not only late-term procedures. The shift has also coincided with the rapid growth of chemical abortions, which now account for an estimated 63% of abortions nationally, a trend AFNM says is increasingly reflected in New Mexico’s abortion landscape.

AFNM leaders say these developments reinforce the importance of direct outreach to mothers alongside broader efforts to expose and challenge abortion practices in the state.

“New Mexico has effectively become an abortion destination for the region,” Shaver said.

“Our leaders are expanding abortion access while eliminating transparency, and the public deserves to know what is happening.”

Recent Efforts in 2026

AFNM leaders say 2026 alone has already demonstrated the breadth of the organization’s work, combining direct outreach to mothers with legislative oversight, investigative reporting, and public awareness campaigns.

Recent efforts this year include:

Sidewalk Outreach and Life-Saving Encounters
AFNM volunteers continue regular outreach outside abortion facilities across the state, offering practical help, resources, and the Gospel to women facing crisis pregnancies.

Legislative Oversight During the 2026 Session
AFNM representatives testified during committee hearings on abortion-related legislation, including Senate Bill 30, which repealed New Mexico’s abortion reporting requirement — a move that removes the state’s longstanding mandate to report induced abortions to public health authorities.

Formal Complaint Filed with the New Mexico Department of Justice
Following testimony during legislative hearings acknowledging that abortion reporting laws had not been enforced for years, AFNM filed a complaint seeking accountability and clarification regarding the state’s oversight of abortion reporting.

Public Records Requests and Investigative Research
AFNM has filed multiple IPRA requests seeking records related to abortion practices and fetal tissue research connected to the University of New Mexico following changes in federal research funding policy.

Interstate Billboard Campaign
To counter efforts promoting New Mexico as an abortion destination, AFNM launched a three-location interstate billboard campaign in Texas, drawing attention to abortion travel into the state.

Public Reporting on Abortion Travel Trends
The organization continues publishing reports and graphics highlighting the rise in out-of-state abortion travel and the growing use of chemical abortions, which now account for about 63% of abortions nationally, according to data from the Guttmacher Institute.

Yet AFNM leaders say the purpose of every one of these efforts ultimately points back to moments like Nathan’s story — when someone shows up and a life is saved.

“This Is Why We Show Up”

Despite the organization’s expanding investigations and legal efforts, AFNM leaders say the heart of their work remains moments like Nathan’s story.

“We can conduct investigations, testify before lawmakers, and file complaints,” Shaver said.

“But the most important work still happens when someone stands on the sidewalk and offers hope to a mother who believes she has none.”

Nathan’s birth, she said, is proof those encounters matter.

“Nathan is here today because someone showed up.”

“New Mexico has become an abortion destination for the region. But when people show up with truth, help, and the Gospel, lives can still be saved. That’s why we will continue showing up — on the sidewalks, in the legislature, and in the public square — because every life is worth defending.”
— Tara Shaver, Abortion Free New Mexico

AFNM says the sidewalks outside abortion facilities remain places where lives can still be saved.

Nathan’s story is a reminder that even as policy battles intensify, the mission remains simple:

show up, offer hope, and save lives whenever possible.

The organization is currently recruiting volunteers and hosting training events for those interested in getting involved.

About Abortion Free New Mexico

Abortion Free New Mexico is a pro-life advocacy organization focused on research, investigative reporting, legislative engagement, and sidewalk outreach. The organization trains volunteers to offer compassionate support and practical resources to women outside abortion facilities while pursuing transparency and accountability surrounding abortion policy in New Mexico.

✚ Abortion Free New Mexico
Standing for Life. Sharing the Gospel

🌐 AbortionFreeNM.com

]]><![CDATA[AMERICA ON THE BRINK — WHERE DOES NEW MEXICO LEADERSHIP STAND?]]>Mon, 02 Mar 2026 22:04:58 GMThttps://www.abortionfreenm.com/news/america-on-the-brink-where-does-new-mexico-leadership-stand

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 enforcement positions.

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.

]]><![CDATA[AFTER NIH FUNDING BAN, UNM FACES QUESTIONS OVER DOCUMENTED USE OF ABORTED BABIES IN MEDICAL RESEARCH]]>Tue, 24 Feb 2026 05:20:21 GMThttps://www.abortionfreenm.com/news/after-nih-funding-ban-unm-faces-questions-over-documented-use-of-aborted-babies-in-medical-research

Federal funding shift intensifies scrutiny of UNM’s December 2025 tissue oversight policy and past congressional findings involving aborted baby tissue transfers.

By Bud Shaver,

Albuquerque, New Mexico —In January 2026, the National Institutes of Health publicly announced that it will no longer fund research involving fetal tissue obtained from elective abortions. The decision affects all NIH grants and contracts and marks a significant shift in federal research funding standards for publicly funded institutions nationwide. According to NIH data, dozens of such projects were funded as recently as fiscal year 2024.

Just weeks earlier, on December 9, 2025, the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center finalized its policy outlining oversight of human tissue in research — a policy released following an IPRA request filed by Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico.

That policy now publicly confirms what federal investigators previously had to compel through subpoenas: UNM operates under a formal institutional framework governing the acquisition, transfer, and use of tissue from aborted babies in medical research within a taxpayer-funded university.

With NIH ending federal funding for such research, Abortion Free New Mexico (AFNM) is demanding immediate public disclosure regarding UNM’s compliance — including whether any federally funded projects are affected and how the university is ensuring adherence to the updated federal standard.

“This is not speculation,” said Tara Shaver, spokesperson for Abortion Free New Mexico. “It is written institutional policy.”

UNM’s 2025 Policy Formalizes Governance of Aborted Baby Tissue

UNM’s “Oversight of Human Tissue in Research” policy outlines:

Acquisition of tissue from aborted babies through external entities
Required assurances of separate abortion and donation consent
Transfer agreements
Internal oversight through the Human Tissue Oversight Committee
Institutional Review Board review
Scientific review processes

The policy does not prohibit the use of tissue from aborted babies. It regulates how that tissue is acquired, stored, and used within university research programs.

“This is not theoretical,” Shaver said. “UNM has codified how tissue from aborted babies is brought into its laboratories and used in medical research.”

A History That Required Subpoenas

UNM’s relationship with a late-term abortion provider was examined by the U.S. House Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives in 2016.

That investigation documented:

Repeated transfers of organs and tissue from aborted babies;
Procurement logs detailing gestational ages and specific organs;
Research programs involving dissection of fetal brains;
Formal criminal referrals to the New Mexico Attorney General and federal authorities.

Those records surfaced only after congressional subpoenas were issued — despite earlier representations suggesting certain procurement documentation did not exist.

“At the time, I was told procurement records did not exist,” Shaver said. “It took federal subpoenas for those documents to surface.”

Shaver previously stated publicly:

“I think they lack transparency, and it’s because they have things to hide. If you don’t have anything to hide, you’re going to put it all out there and show just how ethical you are.”

No state charges followed the congressional referral.

But the documented use of aborted babies in medical research — and the history of non-disclosure — remains part of the public record.

State Law Concerns Were Referred for Investigation

Concerns regarding potential violations of New Mexico law were initially raised by Tara Shaver of Abortion Free New Mexico and later examined during the U.S. House Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives inquiry.

The panel did not limit its findings to federal oversight concerns. It referred potential violations of New Mexico law to the Office of the New Mexico Attorney General.

According to publicly reported documents, potential state law concerns referenced included the Jonathan Spradling Revised Uniform Anatomical Gift Act and the Maternal and Fetal Experimentation Act.

The congressional panel provided evidentiary materials to the New Mexico Attorney General’s office as part of its referral.

No state charges were ultimately filed.

NIH Ends Funding — UNM Compliance Must Be Clarified

In January 2026, NIH announced that it will no longer fund research involving tissue from aborted babies obtained through elective abortions.

For a publicly funded research university, that represents a major funding shift.

Yet UNM has not publicly clarified:

Whether any NIH-funded research involving tissue from aborted babies is ongoing;
Whether such projects have been modified or terminated;
Whether alternative funding streams are being used;
How compliance with the updated federal funding restriction is being verified.

“When federal standards change this dramatically, public institutions must respond transparently,” Shaver said. “Silence is not compliance.”

🔎 OFFICIAL POLICY CONFIRMS FRAMEWORK

UNM’s December 9, 2025 Standard Operating Procedure formalizes oversight of human fetal tissue acquisition and research — months before NIH ended federal funding for such research.

📌 TIMELINE OF FACTS

From subpoenas to federal funding bans — the record shows a pattern that now demands documented compliance.

Public Funding Requires Immediate Accountability

UNM is supported by:

State taxpayer appropriations
Federal research grants
Public institutional funding

The NIH’s January 2026 decision reflects a clear federal position: American tax dollars should not be used to fund research involving fetal tissue obtained from elective abortions.

That principle applies at every level of government.

New Mexico tax dollars should not subsidize research that relies on the bodies of aborted babies.

If federal funding has been halted for this category of research, the public deserves clear and documented confirmation that neither federal nor state taxpayer funds — directly or indirectly — are continuing to support it.

“When organs from aborted babies are transferred into UNM laboratories for medical experiments at a taxpayer-funded institution, transparency is not optional,” Shaver said. “Internal committees are not a substitute for public accountability.”

When funding standards shift this dramatically, public institutions must respond immediately and transparently.

Delay only deepens concern.

AFNM is calling on UNM leadership to:

Publicly confirm whether any NIH-funded research involving tissue from aborted babies is ongoing;
Clarify how its December 2025 protocol has been updated to reflect NIH’s 2026 funding shift;
Release aggregate, non-identifying information regarding current research involving tissue from aborted babies;
Provide assurance that no prohibited federal funds are being used.

UNM’s December 2025 policy formalizes the institutional framework governing the acquisition and use of tissue from aborted babies in medical research. With federal funding standards now changed, the responsibility to demonstrate compliance rests with the institution.

Transparency should not have to be extracted through federal investigation.

The burden is on UNM to prove compliance clearly, immediately, and publicly.

“The American people should not have to rely on congressional subpoenas to find out what their public universities are doing,” Shaver said. “If UNM is fully compliant with the NIH funding ban, it should say so clearly — and prove it. If it isn’t, the public deserves to know that immediately. Transparency delayed is transparency denied.”

]]>