Chapter 1 NMSA 1978 may be cited as the "Election Code".

History: 1953 Comp., § 3-1-1, enacted by Laws 1969, ch. 240, § 1; 1975, ch. 255, § 1.

Temporary provisions. — Laws 2019, ch. 212, § 283 provided that references in the Election Code to "precinct board", shall be deemed to be references to "election board", as that term is defined in Section 1-1-13 NMSA 1978.

Cross references. — For provision that elections are to be free and open, see N.M. Const., art. II, § 8.

For elective franchise generally, see N.M. Const., art. VII.

For date for holding general elections, see N.M. Const., art. XX, § 6.

For provision prohibiting abridging right of suffrage because of race, color or previous servitude, see N.M. Const., art. XXI, § 5.

Ballot requirements to protect public. — In an effort to protect the public from the undesirable effects of an unrestrained nominating process, the legislature has seen fit to place certain requirements on the amount of public support a potential candidate must demonstrate before being placed on the ballot. There is no reason to suspect that these requirements are unreasonable. Bardacke v. Dunigan, 1982-NMSC-093,98 N.M. 473, 649 P.2d 1386.

1927 act. — The 1927 act was a comprehensive Election Code. State ex rel. Abercrombie v. District Court of Fourth Judicial Dist., 1933-NMSC-057, 37 N.M. 407, 24 P.2d 265.

Applicability to referendum. — Former Election Code, and especially Article 7 thereof relating to elections on constitutional amendments and other questions, included and applied to referendum. State v. Perrault, 1929-NMSC-099, 34 N.M. 438, 283 P. 902.

Secrecy and purity of ballot to be protected. — Constitutional and statutory provisions calculated to protect the secrecy and purity of the ballot are to receive favorable consideration. State ex rel. Read v. Crist, 1919-NMSC-005, 25 N.M. 175, 179 P. 629.

Constructions of election laws should further free exercise of franchise. — In construing election statutes, no construction of constitutional or statutory provisions is to be indulged which will defeat or unduly restrict or obstruct the free exercise of the elective franchise unless such is compelled by the strict letter of the law. 1963 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 63-139.

Law reviews. — For note, "Why Gunaji v. Macias Matters to Candidates and Voters: Its Impact on New Mexico Election Law," see 33 N.M.L. Rev 431 (2003).

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — What changes in voting practices or procedures must be precleared under § 5 of Voting Rights Act of 1965 (42 USCA § 1973c) - Supreme Court cases, 146 A.L.R. Fed. 619.