Taming New Mexico; Chief Justice M. Christina Armijo Interview Part 1

You can just say your name, spell your name both first and last name and just give us your title. Chief Judge M. Christina Armijo, Chief Judge of the District of New Mexico, United States District Court. And then spell your first and last name. M. C -H -R -I -S -T -I -N -A -R -M -I -J -O. Yes, I'm sorry. All righty. I'm going to ask you something that wasn't on the list there, but you have a little, you have some family history in law, right? You're grandfather, you're going back at least your grandfather. Tell me about, so to give people an idea how you arrived here as the Chief Justice, what in your family before that happened, what's your connection to the legal system prior to that? My grandfather was Luis Enrique Armijo, Luis E. Armijo. He became an attorney in November of 1915,

101 years ago, and he read the law with a gentleman named Elijah Van Bure and Long. Elijah Van Bure and Long was the Chief Justice of the New Mexico Territorial Court in the late 1800s. In fact, he was appointed by the President of the United States and was sent to Santa Fe. He was a trained attorney. Justice Long served for many years as the Chief Justice, and when he retired, he moved to Las Vegas, New Mexico, the first Las Vegas, my hometown. And there, my grandfather read the law with him, and when my grandfather passed the bar exam in 1915, he was admitted both into the state courts and into the federal court. He practiced law with Justice Long for several years before in 1924. He became a state district judge and served for a little over 34 years, I believe,

in that capacity. A great span of history, really, if you look at the time from 1924 until his death in 1965. There was one six -year term that he didn't serve. He was a great inspiration to me. His brother, Jose Armijo, was a graduate of Vanderbilt University, practiced law in New Mexico. His son and my uncle Roberto Armijo served on the New Mexico Court of Appeals for a short time before I did some years ago, and we have many other attorneys in the family. But Luis, my grandfather, was a tremendous influence and really an inspiration. He was a person who always ensured that there was a place at the table for me. And I think that was remarkable being a young granddaughter and having that influence from a grandfather. That's great. That's a great story about the challenges. I guess what I got out of that was that

your work never stops. That you owe it to people to keep dispensing justice regularly and fairly and consistently. I think that was basically the tenor of it. So if you wanted to tell me that story starting with your confirmation hearing, then it was before. You know, I have served on this court for 15 years now. It'll be 15 years later this month, November. My confirmation hearing was set in October of 2001 just a month after the tragedy of 9 -11. I was summoned to Washington for that hearing and arrived in Washington the day after the first of several anthrax letters were opened in our nation's capital. The House of Representatives recessed. The United States Capitol Building was closed. All of these Senate office buildings were under quarantine. And this was the news that greeted me as I arrived for my confirmation hearing. I remember spending the day at the Justice Department along with four other

nominees waiting word as to whether our hearing would go forward. In fact, we were told that Senator Leahy who then chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee would likely send us back home because of the crisis. It was very late that day. I have to think it was 430 or 530 that word was received at justice that in fact the hearing would go forward the following day. And what is remarkable to me is that the United States Capitol Building was reopened. Just for us, we held the hearing in a very special room, a very small room where the senators sit across from each other on a long table and hammer out the budget. It was not the very formal uncomfortable looking hearing room that you see often on C -SPAN for hearings. But I remember the senators' words as he began the hearing. Senator Leahy said that we can never allow

our government to come to a stop because of the crisis and the hearing went forward in a very memorable way. And it reminded me also of the short period of sequester that we experienced in 2013. That was a few months after I became Chief Judge of our district. And the financial crisis had a tremendous effect on the federal judiciary and a tremendously difficult effect here in the District of New Mexico. We are one of five border states, but we have the highest number of felony filings per judge, per Article 3 judge. And the fewest number of judges in comparison to the other five border districts, the other border districts. The state or the federal public defender, I have to say this again, the federal public defender suffered greatly.

They had hiring freezes in many of their offices throughout the United States. Folks were let go. Here they could not fill vacancies. The U .S. Attorney's Office was not able to fill vacancies. The United States Marshall had a hiring freeze here at the court through the efforts of our clerk of court and our administrator. We were able to avoid any furloughs and certainly no one was laid off. But the unit heads worked together, including the United States probation office, to ensure that all services were delivered timely to all of our federal defendants. That they were able to come to court, that they were able to receive the resources that they were entitled to as a result of our efforts to supervise them. And I will say that unlike many districts in the United States, the courthouse doors here never closed. We got through it quite successfully. It reminds me in

many ways of New Mexico and what it means to work and live for such a long time in a state that has experienced so much through its history and it's a long history. The word that comes to my mind is that we are survivors. We get through it and we look forward. That is how I think part of our culture defines us. The work culture, the culture of our diverse populations. New Mexico is a special place. For those of us who can trace their roots back many, many generations. And for those of our people who trace their roots many thousands of years here in our state. I think that we can define ourselves in a way that says that we are always respectful of our traditions and always respectful of the wisdom of our elders. That is New Mexico, that is who we are.

Great, thank you. Compact it like that if we could. I think it's a great story. My confirmation hearing, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. My confirmation hearing in 2001 was set for a day in October. I remember arriving at our nation's capital the day after the first of many anthrax letters were opened. I arrived knowing that the capital had been closed. The house had recessed. The senate office buildings were of course the hearing would have occurred. We're under quarantine. But the hearing went on. Senator Leahy who then shared the senate judiciary committee spoke very clearly when he opened up the United States capital building for us for this very, very important hearing. He said we cannot let the world know that our government comes to a stop because of a crisis. This hearing had to go forward.

And I've never forgotten that when we experienced the small or short sequester in 2013, a few months after I became chief. I remembered those words and I will say that it had a tremendous effect to the budgetary crisis on the federal judiciary. But all of the unit heads here in our district worked very hard tirelessly to ensure that our court doors remained open. Never one day did the courthouse close because of that. We got through it. We survived it. Great. Very good. Thank you. Frank. Frank, you go. I'm not in the business of telling judges what to say, but you did a great job there. One of the addition things we didn't get into will just do this as a little separate bite that we can use or not use. But you said at the

end of that original piece that you had emailed me that, you know, it's important that it went on because of what this part of the judicial process means to lit against it. We have to get it right the first time and we don't know less to our litigants and to the public. I think just the second to last hearing. It's the second to last paragraph there in the long version. I'm looking at my notes here. I think it's on this one. It's this paragraph right there. And I don't think we need to say that the face of the French government that just that, you know, it was important that we never stopped doing. I'm always mindful of the

enormity of the consequences. I'm always mindful of the consequences of the judicial process on the lives of our litigants. So we strive very hard to get it right the first time. We owe no less to the litigants who appear before us in our courtroom and we certainly owe no less. We owe no less to the litigants who appear before us in our courtrooms. And we certainly owe no less to the public. Is that okay? No, let's do it. Just do the whole thing over again when we're done. It'll be hard to chop. Yeah, I know. Word keeps going out of my brain. That's okay. That's okay. And again, if you could tie it into what you had previously said, it was important. It's important. Really? Yes. We are

rolling. We owe a responsibility not only to the litigants who appear before us in the courtroom, but to the public that we serve. And we are ever mindful of the significance of the... I can't get this word. Just give me a second. No, no, no, no, no, no, no problem. You have teleprompters? I have more. As judges, we strive to ensure that substantial justice is done in every case. And you can't do that if you deny access to the courtroom. And that's why it was so important to us within the context of one of the busiest districts in the United States to ensure that the courthouse remained open. And it was. I think every judge here is mindful of the

enormity of the consequences of the judicial process. And certainly the effects on the litigants who appear before us were mindful of that. We are public servants. We're mindful also that we are here to serve the public. Those doors remained open. I didn't mean to do that. I didn't mean to flip my hands. All right. Judges are public servants. And it's important that we are ever mindful of the responsibility to provide access to the courts to every litigants. In a private. Got to do it again. Judges are public servants. And we must recognize always that we provide timely access to the courts to every litigant who appears before us. And

that's why it was so important during this period of financial crisis really and its tremendous effect on our judiciary that the courthouse doors never closed. We are mindful of the serious consequences within the judicial process both with respect to civil law and criminal law. And to deny a litigant or to delay a litigants time with respect to their case to me is not doing justice. Perfect. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Any time. How do we define New Mexico? I think we define New Mexico through the lens of its blended cultures. Going back the many, many generations of folks who can trace the roots and the many who can trace the roots thousands of years.

New Mexico did find for itself. I think for many hundreds of years before 1846 the territorial form of government was imposed. The judges, I think of that era, often were not trained attorneys, often were not attorneys. Some were, fortunately. Justice Elijah Van Burenlong, for example, who was the chief judge of the New Mexico Territorial Supreme Court, was a trained attorney. As we've evolved as a court, but really as a state, you cannot escape the influence that the Native American culture has and its traditions has on our legal process. I recall a case a few years ago, a civil case, that was a medical malpractice case, where an individual had been injured

through an accident occurring on the Navajo reservation. And in the context of his civil suit against the United States government under the Federal Torts Claims Act, his attorneys asked me to apply a unique concept known as Nalia, or the law of the place. This concept of Nalia is very much a part of the Navajo tradition of resolving conflict of some sort or another. While it may not be traditional peacemaking, it is a method of conflict resolution, it is a method by which a person is made whole, if he or she believes that they have been wronged in some sense. I considered that very carefully, and I remember holding a special hearing, and having former Navajo Chief Justice Robert Yazzi testify as an expert for the court to provide information to the parties

about this concept, because he had worked very hard to incorporate this into the Navajo laws during his term. I came very close to permitting it to be used, but the court was resolved on a different basis, and we never got to that point. But I do think that cultural issues and the recognition of alternative resolutions dealing with sometimes very unique tribal customs are valid for consideration. I'm not here to change the laws, that's another branch of government, but oftentimes you do have these kinds of issues that commend a court and commend a play in a federal lawsuit. I remember the very first case that I had as a young attorney, and it was an dispute between two sets of children who were claiming to be children of a

deceased gentleman. A Navajo man, the two sets of children were quite old, the father died when he was probably close to 100 years old, and it was a dispute over his estate or his belongings. And what was an issue was the legitimacy of the claims that they had, and it really came down to custom tradition. And the entire trial was that of understanding whether or not facts incidents had occurred in the course of relationship with the respective mothers of these children that would legitimize one set or the other. Very valid for consideration, and I think we often don't recognize that that is very much a part of who we are, and very much a real part of what we should consider. And should understand about the cases that we hear when these issues come in, court interpreting is another example. Unless

I believe an attorney fully understands often cultural nuances that pertain to their client, I think that that client perhaps may not be receiving effective assistance of counsel. We know that I think in the Navajo culture, death is a taboo. It is not talked about. You have murder cases, you have very serious assault cases that come in to this court because of our jurisdiction over serious crimes occurring in Indian country. And oftentimes, I think there is a communication gap that exists aside from just the literal translation of English to Navajo and back. In not understanding reasons why perhaps a belief may occur and not occur, that to me affects greatly how an attorney might approach a defense, for example. The people that have explained this to me in the greatest way have been the interpreters,

and I find that fascinating. They are people who are very wise, and in the context of interpreting undertake a responsibility that is more than simply literal, one language to another, but oftentimes having to explain and help one side of the other understand the nuances here. I think we are lacking in our appreciation of those kinds of factors that influence often the work that we do. Okay, good stuff. I love the examples because there is a really, again, that we... I guess the thing of the way to start this, the federal court system is sort of the latest tradition we have embraced here in terms of wisdom. I'm trying to think how you phrased it the first time, but the fact that we have this long tradition of

wisdom in the cultures here. The federal court happens to be the most recent iteration of that, but within the Native American culture as you explained, we have a tradition of that, within the Hispanic, with the colonial period and stuff. We have a tradition of that, and then up to the present, how we got here today, but that it was always here. So, like, again, the federal court's not the end all be all. It didn't come out of nowhere and just be... in New Mexico anyway, it's part of this long tradition. Is that making sense to you? No. How you said that, the first time I'm trying to... The first time today? Oh, when we're talking back there. You said that with the blended cultures and the tradition of wisdom that we've always had and that's... Then, of course, somewhere I want to weave in the fact that, again, you're a 13th generation here. So, you're literally part of this tradition that was here before

you and is here after you. So, I don't know if this... think about how you might... Are you... you're proud to be part of this tradition, or I don't know. But... Okay. I'm trying to re -create it for the way it's said at the first time, but yeah. I think there's important parts about describing what New Mexico is about in its cultures. My family has been a part of this beautiful state for 13 generations, 13 proud generations. I was one... once asked by someone, well, why don't people from New Mexico ever leave? They seem to just stay. And my thought is, why should they? We are very anchored. If I can use that word, very anchored to the land, to this environment.

Why would they? We're anchored to our traditions, whether it's the great traditions of the Hispanic, the Spanish families of New Mexico, the great traditions of our Native American cultures in New Mexico. Why would that change? I've yet to have a reason that would persuade me. Does that say it? That's good. All right. That's good. What's... It's not ringing a bell. Well, the arrival of General Stephen Watts' kerney into the New Mexico territory in 1846 was not the arrival of law and justice. New Mexico had a very rich tradition of Spanish colonial derived law. There was a very rich tradition of conflict resolution among the

Native American peoples who lived in this state prior to that time. So the arrival of General kerney in his army of the West, because that's what it was, it was his army of West, that arrived, brought with it new laws. So many of the New Mexico statutes really can trace the roots to the Missouri statutes because one of his soldiers had a copy of the Missouri statutes in his saddlebag, and they said, well, that's good enough for us here. So let's see about putting some laws together, but it's a tradition that was inherited. New Mexico law, state law, if I might, digress a little bit. Respects a great deal of the Spanish law and custom. Community property. There's nothing new here, I think. There's a community property, the rights of women to own property. It's really the rights of women to own property. Well, there's two new issues because you've got the whole land grant community property.

Yeah. I mean, also, maybe we shouldn't say that. I mean, I've gotten that wrong. Is it community property that derived from the Spanish? Well, okay, no, I see what you're saying. Women, women, women, women, women own, yeah, women own property derived from the Spanish. So we have this. Oh, right. That's what I'm trying to say is that. And then I, I almost think back to communal land grant property. Oh, no, no, no. Oh, no, that's fine. That's. I'm not sure that that's correct though. I may have mistated the law. I know that. Well, I only, yeah, I don't. I mean, the concept of a woman only. I mean, the Gallegos. Yeah, the land grant. She was a woman landowner. Yeah. Apparently, my brother wasn't that unusual. Yeah. So, okay. Let's pick it up for now. For example, in the Spanish tradition, women own property. There was never an issue about their right to own property and stand on the same footing as their husbands. For example,

that was a little different in other states and in other jurisdictions. So New Mexico uniquely has inherited a great tradition. And I think fortunately has not abandoned those traditions. Perhaps in the federal system, because of the structure and the rules by which we operate, there is less of that to be seen as there would be within the state courts. But I think that with the jurisdiction we have over major crimes occurring in Indian country, some civil litigation that would occur relating to government properties, that oftentimes those traditions, historical traditions, come into play. And I think they should. That's it. Okay. Actually. Oh. That's kind of the same thing we. Well, let's just do another. Okay. Let's do a

different take on it. All right. I can tie it into the naturalization ceremony. And yeah, I think I like the idea of indoctrinating people into the Mexico culture. I mean, that's that to be interesting how you prepare those. Well, I'm not. You know, they're here for a reason. I guess or maybe they'll leave the next day. I don't know. Okay. Okay. You know, one of the nicest things the judge does, because it is a win -win situation, is to welcome and administer the oath to new citizens. We all do that. And I've enjoyed doing that over the years. And one of the things that I say to the new citizens after the oath has been given is that I hope that each of them and their families establish long and proud roots in the state of New Mexico. And I remind them that it is a state that is respectful of its traditions and respectful of the wisdom of its elders.

Okay. That's it. That's it. That's it. That's it. Do the naturalization. The naturalization thing. Yeah. Just a minute so we have another take on it. Let me see here. Okay. Do you want to talk about the, being one of the nice, the nice of things judges do? Okay. One of the most enjoyable aspects of my job, and I think I can speak for my colleagues, is welcoming new citizens and administering the oath of citizenship. When I speak to the group,

I ask them to share the richness of their own family histories and their own family traditions with their children. But I also ask that they consider establishing long and deep roots in the state of New Mexico, a state that is respectful of its traditions, and a state that is respectful of the wisdom of its elders. I want to say it. Did you want to amplify it all? I mean, it's kind of a, you know, it's kind of a spiritual thing. You know, I can identify throughout their life having held. I think every person can say that throughout their lives they could identify one person that they might consider a wise person and elder. Certainly, that is so much a part of our Native American cultures here in New Mexico.

But I think it's a part of who we are as individuals within our own special family traditions. And I think that's important to maintain and to pass on. That's it. Ah, okay. Sometimes it's going to keep seeing it over and over sometimes when it comes to concept of New Mexicans as survivors. Yeah, and that work just came into play, I'm trying to figure out how to express that. Well, I guess, you know, again, if you want to take a historical view that we've been through, you know, going back to, well, Native American times, to Spanish colonial times, to the crazy territorial ones, that we've been through some turbulent, interesting times, and New Mexico has survived. I mean, that was what the context understood it for me the first time. So I'm thinking of this as sort of a way that we're going to wrap up the show, you know, that

we've just presented you this long, interesting, strange history. And the upshot of it is that despite all that, we came out the other end of it and were survivors. And I think that's dead on for what this state is about. So take a second to think about it. I suppose there's a view by many that New Mexico is a conquered people. The Spanish came, but there were others here before. General Kerney came in 1846 with his army of the West and claimed this vast area as part of the union. And he marched on west to what is now California. New Mexicans have

weathered a great deal. There have been many crises throughout our history. But I think if there was one word that defined the course it took, is that we are survivors. Is that all right? Sorry. The most difficult thing that I do in the courtroom is sentence a criminal defendant deprived him or her of liberty. A few years ago, the United States Supreme Court granted trial judges a limited discretion in sentencing criminal defendants. And even with that discretion, I find it tremendously challenging

to ensure that justice is done in a sentencing. I think you're very fortunate in the federal system to have the resources of the United States, a pre -trial and probation department who can provide resources to the court that assist us in being able to evaluate an individual before sentencing. We have a very thorough evaluation of that person's medical history, social history, educational history, mental health history. Certainly criminal history. All of these things play a part in identifying who this person is and what resources can be provided to that person either during the time they are confined or upon their release into society. The ultimate goal being to ensure as best as we can that they can successfully reintegrate back into society. That, to me, is the most challenging aspect of the work that I do. A component to that in this district,

which is one of the busiest districts in the United States, is being able to provide timely resolution of legal issues to both lit against in criminal court as well as civil court. And that comes down to, I think, very good and effective case management. That poses a challenge, I think, for every district judge in this district. Did you agree that actually answers to my questions? That's good. Okay. That's great. You sort of answered, but to you, what is the most important part of what you do as a federal judge? Judges are public servants.

I think it's important that judges recognize that I recognize that the perception of fairness and impartiality is just as important as the reality of fairness and impartiality. In any decision I undertake or any ruling that I make, I am cognizant of the effect of my decisions on litigants. I try to provide timely disposition of cases and to ensure always that substantial justice is done. The due process is provided in every case and that the court remains open to all litigants. Is it sort of a corollary to that? Is that is sometimes frustrating part of your job trying to do all that? I mean, do

you feel that you are able to keep on top of it? We are very fortunate in the district of New Mexico that because of the tremendously high caseload we have that we have the assistance of visiting judges from other circuits and other districts throughout the United States. They are of tremendous assistance especially in Las Cruces, New Mexico with the heavy criminal caseload there. But they also assist the judges up north and it's interesting because there's some discussion now about judge sharing from one district to another, for example a district that has a significantly smaller caseload compared to a district that has a very high caseload, a large caseload. And there is discussions that I think

in the near future will be formalizing agreements to allow judges from other districts to come in and take a small part of a docket within a district that has a tremendously high caseload. Again, the goal is to ensure that timely access to the courts is afforded all litigants and that substantial justice is done at the end of the day. Thank you. What's the most rewarding part of it? I enjoy coming to work every day, coming into my office knowing that I've provided access to the courts for my litigants. That I've been able to explain my decisions because that's important. I think it's important for any litigant to be able to understand from the judge why he or she did what he or she

did in taking an action. And I enjoy working with my chamber staff who I believe to have a tremendously wonderful work ethic and great chemistry to get our job done. And what over the course of, well, starting with Kering, since you brought him up, what has New Mexico and the federal government done right in bringing this legal system, overlaying this legal system on hundreds of years of previous tradition? And then bringing it into the 20th century? Are there places that can still be improved, I guess, as the other part of that question? New Mexico, the state of New Mexico, is the fifth largest state geographically in the United States. It's one of the smallest in terms of population. All

right. What that translates into is that we are a very rural state in terms of our populations. We have 19 Indian Pueblos here to Apache reservations within our state and a portion of the Navajo reservation. So many people who should have access to the federal courts often don't because they are unable to come to court. I see that really affecting our criminal docket. There are so many instances where, for example, an individual has been adjudicated guilty of a crime but have been released or have satisfied their sentence and their return home often within the vast array of one reservation or Pueblo, so distant from the courts, but also so distant from the resources that they need that would assist them in

continuing to successfully reintegrate back into society. By that, I mean, they are far removed from counseling services, far removed from other kinds of services. They're a part of their conditions, all right, imposed by the court to assist them. What does that mean? It means that because a person doesn't have a car and their neighbor doesn't have a car or their neighbor may be living many, many miles away from them, that they lack the very basic necessities, very basic transportation often means of communication by telephone to be able to interact with their probation officer, for example, or to be able to come into court on an assigned day. And sometimes those, what we would consider, I would consider, as judges, very minor violations, mushroom and roll into tremendous violations that can have conditions of release revoked because of these violations that pile up. That wouldn't happen in a person

living in Albuquerque, for example, or lost cruises, or within a city environment. So we have a long way to go in that regard. And I think it really speaks to access. We've not done very well with respect to providing adequate access, meaningful access to the courts.