David K Thomson
Democrat | New Mexico
Candidate Profile
Leans Activist
BIOGRAPHY
EDUCATION
Candidate did not provide
WORK & MILITARY
Candidate did not provide
AFFILIATIONS
Candidate did not provide
POLITICAL OFFICES HELD
Candidate did not provide
POLITICAL OFFICES SOUGHT
Candidate did not provide
SELECTED CONTRIBUTIONS
LIBERAL
GIVEN BY CANDIDATE (3)
Bruce Braley (2014)
Michelle Grisham (2014)
State Democratic Party Organizations (2014)
RECEIVED BY CANDIDATE (0)
OTHER INFORMATION
Ballotpedia’s 2020 Ballotpedia Courts: State Partisanship study classified Bacon as having a “Strong Democrat” confidence score based on an analysis of state supreme court justices’ partisan affiliations.
In State ex rel. Torrez v. Board of County Commissioners for Lea County (2025), in which Justice Thomson joined the unanimous opinion, the New Mexico Supreme Court considered whether counties and municipalities could enforce local ordinances restricting abortion providers and abortion-related materials. The Court held that they could not because the ordinances were preempted by state law. It explained that the Reproductive and Gender-Affirming Health Care Freedom Act bars local governments from restricting access to reproductive health care, and New Mexico’s statewide medical licensing laws create a uniform system for regulating health care providers. As a result, local governments lacked authority to impose additional abortion-related regulations.
In Candelaria v. Grisham (2023), Chief Justice Thomson joined the unanimous opinion, in which the New Mexico Supreme Court considered whether the Governor or the Legislature controlled approximately $1.75 billion in federal ARPA funds. The Court held that the funds were subject to legislative appropriation because ARPA gave New Mexico broad discretion over how the money could be spent. Since the Governor would have to make policy choices about allocating the funds, allowing the executive to spend them unilaterally would infringe on the Legislature’s exclusive constitutional power to appropriate public money.
In Grisham v. Romero (2021), Justice Thomson specially concurred with the New Mexico Supreme Court’s holding that the Governor and Secretary of Health had authority to impose temporary COVID-19 business restrictions. The Court held the indoor dining ban was lawful because it was supported by public health evidence and was not arbitrary. Justice Thomson agreed but warned that emergency powers require limits and continued judicial review.
In State v. Zachariah G. (2021), in which Justice Thomson joined the unanimous opinion, the New Mexico Supreme Court considered whether a defendant “uses” a deadly weapon during an assault when the weapon is not physically displayed or handled but its presence contributes to the victim’s fear. The Court held that a defendant uses a deadly weapon when the weapon’s presence is intentionally used to facilitate the assault. The Court reasoned that a broader definition of “use” was necessary to distinguish mere possession from situations where a weapon’s presence is leveraged to create fear and further an assault.
In Jones v. Albuquerque Police Dep't (2020), which Justice Thomson joined the majority opinion, the New Mexico Supreme Court considered whether the Inspection of Public Records Act (IPRA) lets law enforcement agencies withhold records while a criminal investigation is ongoing. The Court held that it does not. It explained that IPRA only allows agencies to withhold records that reveal confidential sources, investigative methods, certain confidential information, or people accused but not charged with a crime. Because the Department of Public Safety did not show that the requested records fit those exceptions, it was wrong to withhold the records. The Court reversed the lower courts and sent the case back for further proceedings.
QUESTIONNAIRE
RIGHT TO LIFE
Was Dobbs v. Jackson rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: In Dobbs, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the federal constitution does not confer a right to abortion.)
Did not answer
Does the federal Constitution support the right to physician assisted suicide? Please explain in light of Washington v. Glucksberg (1997).
Did not answer
Human life deserves legal protection from conception until natural death.
Did not answer
How do you view the judiciary’s role in matters of abortion regulation following Dobbs?
Did not answer
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY
Do you believe religious liberty is at risk in the United States. If so, what is the judiciary's proper role in addressing this issue?
Did not answer
Does the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment require government to be strictly secular or does it allow for the nation's religious heritage?
Did not answer
Was Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: The U.S. Supreme Court held tha the state may not show religious hostility when enforcing anti-discrimination laws against a business owner.)
Did not answer
VALUES
Briefly describe your spiritual beliefs and values.
Did not answer
What is your understanding of parental rights under the Constitution regarding the upbringing of children, particularly regarding choices about education and sexual identity?
Did not answer
Is gender identity a protected class under the Constitution? Please explain the constitutional basis for your view.
Did not answer
ABOUT YOU
Have you ever been convicted of a felony? If so, please explain.
Did not answer
Have you ever been penalized for sexual misconduct in either civil or criminal court? If so, please explain.
Did not answer
I voted in these primaries and general elections:
Did not answer
JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY
Describe your judicial philosophy.
Did not answer
Do you believe judges should primarily apply the law according to its original public meaning, or do you believe the law evolves over time to reflect contemporary values?
Did not answer
Which current or past U.S. Supreme Court justice best reflects your judicial philosophy?
Did not answer
Was Obergefell v. Hodges rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: The U.S. Supreme Court held Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses create a right for same-sex couples to marry.)
Did not answer
A. How should a judge approach a case where the constitutional or statutory text is clear on its face? B. Conversely, how should a judge proceed when the text is ambiguous or silent on a disputed issue?
Did not answer
What is your view of judicial restraint versus judicial activism? How do you define each?
Did not answer
What is the proper role of a judge?
Did not answer
When applying or interpreting the text of a statute or constitutional provision, is it ever proper for a judge to consider present day public opinion or consequences?
Did not answer
If precedent departs from the Constitution’s text or original meaning, should a judge follow it or correct the error? Please explain.
Did not answer
CRIMINAL JUSTICE & PUBLIC SAFETY
The burden of proof in a criminal case is generally that the state must provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Some say the reason the burden of proof is so high is because we greatly value ensuring that the innocent are not unjustly imprisoned. Please comment on this topic.
Did not answer
When reviewing wrongful conviction claims, what role, if any, should judges play in determining remedies?
Did not answer
2ND AMENDMENT
What is your understanding of the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms?
Did not answer
OTHER IMPORTANT ISSUES
Which branch of government do you believe was intended to wield the most authority?
Did not answer
