Can agencies claim immunity from NM Civil Rights Act? Judges get new guidelines
Jun. 2—SANTA FE — New Mexico's Supreme Court on Monday drew new boundaries for a 2021 law that allows individuals to file lawsuits in state court against government agencies for alleged civil rights violations.
The unanimous ruling by the state's highest court in a lawsuit involving the New Mexico Racing Commission establishes that agencies can be immune from legal liability for certain disciplinary actions they take. But whether "judicial immunity" can be claimed must be decided by a judge, based on the facts of a specific case.
"Judicial immunity protects individuals and governmental entities from liability when functioning as an 'arm of the court' or, in other words, when performing a function that is integral to a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding," Justice Briana Zamora wrote in the court's opinion.
The Supreme Court's ruling comes four years after Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham signed into law the state Civil Rights Act, a measure that was prompted by protests against racism and police misconduct following the 2020 death of George Floyd. Going forward, the ruling could provide more clarity for future New Mexico cases filed under the law, though the political winds that prompted its passage have waned.
The legislation was opposed at the time of its approval by New Mexico cities and counties, along with some law enforcement officials, who expressed concern it could expose taxpayers to expensive settlements and lead to higher insurance costs.
Prior to lawmakers approving the 2021 law, lawsuits alleging civil rights violations in New Mexico could only be filed in federal court, not in state court.
Specifically, the new state law was intended to largely eliminate a different kind of legal immunity — the qualified immunity that law enforcement officers can claim in cases involving possible misconduct.
The case at the heart of the Supreme Court ruling involves Brad Bolen, a licensed horse trainer from Texas who was fined $500 after a New Mexico Racing Commission disciplinary panel investigated his argument with a racing steward.
Bolen appealed the fine and also filed a lawsuit against the New Mexico Gaming Commission, claiming his constitutional free speech rights had been violated.
The gaming commission's initial request to have the lawsuit dismissed on the grounds of judicial immunity was rejected by a state judge in Albuquerque. But the judge's ruling was then overturned by the state Court of Appeals, setting the stage for the Supreme Court to weigh in.
While the Supreme Court largely sided with the Court of Appeals, it opted not to decide the merits of the case in question.
Instead, the Supreme Court remanded the case back to the District Judge Joshua Allison, with guidance that he consider the underlying claims by weighing six factors to determine whether judicial immunity should be applied.
Those six factors, including the nature of the disciplinary proceeding and the need to protect decision-makers from harassment or intimidation, were adopted from a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on judicial immunity.
The exact number of lawsuits filed under New Mexico's Civil Rights Act in the four years since it was enacted was not immediately available Monday, said a spokesman with the Administrative Office of the Courts.
In large part, that's because such cases are lumped with other types of complaints in the judiciary's case-filing system.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
7 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Mexican Supreme Court remake: Ruling-party loyalists dominate the new bench
MEXICO CITY — Judicial candidates closely linked to Mexico's ruling party have swept every position on the nation's newly transformed Supreme Court, according to final results released Wednesday from the controversial judicial vote. The nine incoming justices on the high court have strong ties to the dominant Morena bloc headed by President Claudia Sheinbaum, and their election signals a radical shift in Mexico's balance of power. Among them is a new chief justice, Hugo Aguilar, who would become the country's first top jurist of Indigenous origin since the legendary Benito Juárez, who also served as president, more than a century and a half ago. Electoral regulators still must validate the vote, though that is viewed as a formality. The Supreme Court justices, along with almost 900 other newly elected federal jurists, are scheduled to take office Sept. 1. Mexican authorities have been tallying the results from Sunday's controversial national balloting — championed by Morena — in which only 13% of eligible voters went to the polls. Despite the paltry turnout, Sheinbaum has lauded the election as 'marvelous' and 'a great success.' She has hailed the replacement of the entire federal judiciary as a victory of democracy over corruption and nepotism. The president has been especially effusive about the likely emergence of a chief justice from one of Mexico's long-marginalized Indigenous communities. 'It's a profound change,' she said. Indigenous Mexicans, comprising about 10% of the population, have long been among the country's poorest residents and are often subject to racism. Some detractors have mocked the desire of Aguilar to don Indigenous dress instead of the traditional black robes. Sheinbaum said she supports his effort to honor his cultural roots. Mexico has became the first country worldwide to elect all of its judges, from Supreme Court justices down to thousands of local magistrates. Many independent observers have assailed the exercise as a triumph of politics over justice — and a potentially fatal blow for the separation of powers, a crucial pillar of democratic rule. 'This is a setback for democracy in Mexico,' said Stephanie Brewer, who heads the Mexico analysis section of the Washington Office on Latin America, a human rights research group. 'When you have concentration of power over all three branches of government, you start to erode democratic rule.' Sheinbaum's Morena party already has super-majorities in the Mexican Congress and dominates many state and local governments. Coparmex, a Mexican business group, said it had detected 'multiple irregularities' in the vote and declared that the new judiciary could hamper investment in Mexico, the United States' leading trading partner. 'Without independent justice, there is no sustainable investment,' Coparmex said in a statement. 'Mexico cannot aspire to progress without legality.' The revamped Supreme Court will have nine judges, compared to 11 in the current high court. The Supreme Court will also have reduced ability to challenge congressional and presidential actions. Sheinbaum has dismissed much of the the criticism of the election as 'classism and racism,' and has celebrated the rise of Aguilar, the apparent chief justice-elect, who hails from the Mixtec ethnic group in southern Oaxaca state. She accused opponents of fomenting 'hate.' Aguilar, who currently oversees human rights affairs for the government's National Institute of Indigenous Peoples, garnered 6 million votes, more than any other Supreme Court contender, results showed. Second highest in Supreme Court balloting was Lenia Batres Guardarrama, 5.7 million votes. From humble origins, Aguilar has said that a desire to defend Indigenous rights inspired him to study law. He has been widely praised for his legal acumen and dedication to the poor. 'Hugo seems to be a brilliant lawyer,' said Joaquín Galván, a human rights attorney in Oaxaca state. 'But I would advise against idealizing him like he is the new Benito Juárez, or to say that—just because he is Indigenous—he cannot be criticized.' Some critics have also accused Aguilar of selling out to win Indigenous support for controversial development projects promoted by former President Andrés Manuel López Obradorm, notably the $25-billion Maya Train, which some Indigenous groups resisted as destructive of the environment and of native communities. 'Without doubt Aguilar has been a promoter and defender of the government of Morena,' Galván said. Among the other candidates leading in the voting for seats on the Supreme Court are three sitting justices appointed by López Obrador, who founded Morena, and was Sheinbaum's mentor. Those three are: Batres, Yasim Esquivel and Loretta Ortiz. By law, the new court will be composed of five women and four men. For years, López Obrador battled with the country's Supreme Court about a number of contentious issues, notably his plan to overhaul the nation's electoral system. Nearing the end of his six-year term, he championed the controversial reform that led to Sunday's judicial overhaul. Special correspondent Cecilia Sánchez Vidal contributed.
Boston Globe
21 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Unsealed records in Abrego Garcia case offer few details that are new, unknown
'It does not disclose any potentially privileged or otherwise sensitive information for which a compelling government interest outweighs the right to access,' Xinis wrote. Xinis noted that some documents were public before the court was asked to seal them the next day. Those filings contained a back-and-forth between Abrego Garcia's attorneys and the U.S. government over efforts to return him from El Salvador. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Trump administration lawyers often objected to answering questions, arguing that they involve state secrets, sensitive diplomatic negotiations and other protected information. Advertisement For example, the U.S. attorneys mentioned 'appropriate diplomatic discussions with El Salvador.' But they wrote that disclosing the details 'could negatively impact any outcome.' Xinis also ordered the partial release of a transcript from an April 30 court hearing. Some of it will be reacted to protect potentially classified information. Wednesday's ruling was unrelated to the Trump administration pending invocation of the state secrets privilege, a legal doctrine often used in military cases. The administration has argued that releasing information about the Abrego Garcia matter in open court — or even to the judge in private – could jeopardize national security. Advertisement Xinis is yet to rule on the state secrets claim. Abrego Garcia's attorneys have argued that the Trump administration has done nothing to return the Maryland construction worker. They say the government is invoking the privilege to hide behind the misconduct of mistakenly deporting him and refusing to bring him back. Abrego Garcia's deportation violated a U.S. immigration judge's order in 2019 that shielded Abrego Garcia from expulsion to his native country. The immigration judge determined that Abrego Garcia faced likely persecution by a local Salvadoran gang that terrorized his family. Abrego Garcia's American wife sued over his deportation. Xinis ordered his return on April 4. The Supreme Court ruled on April 10 that the administration must work to bring him back. President Donald Trump told ABC News in late April that he could retrieve Abrego Garcia with a phone call to El Salvador's president. But Trump said he wouldn't do it because Abrego Garcia is a member of the MS-13 gang, an allegation that Abrego Garcia denies and for which he was never charged.
23 minutes ago
Unsealed records in Abrego Garcia case offer few details that are new, unknown
A federal judge on Wednesday ordered the unsealing of several court documents in the lawsuit over Kilmar Abrego Garcia's deportation, rejecting the Trump administration's arguments that it would risk national security. U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis in Maryland issued her order after media organizations, including The Associated Press, argued the public has a right to access court records under the First Amendment. Filings unsealed so far offer little information that's new or unknown publicly. Xinis described one document as 'relatively boilerplate.' It was a request by the Trump administration to temporarily halt discovery, an early phase of a lawsuit where parties share evidence. 'It does not disclose any potentially privileged or otherwise sensitive information for which a compelling government interest outweighs the right to access,' Xinis wrote. Xinis noted that some documents were public before the court was asked to seal them the next day. Those filings contained a back-and-forth between Abrego Garcia's attorneys and the U.S. government over efforts to return him from El Salvador. Trump administration lawyers often objected to answering questions, arguing that they involve state secrets, sensitive diplomatic negotiations and other protected information. For example, the U.S. attorneys mentioned 'appropriate diplomatic discussions with El Salvador.' But they wrote that disclosing the details 'could negatively impact any outcome.' Xinis also ordered the partial release of a transcript from an April 30 court hearing. Some of it will be reacted to protect potentially classified information. Wednesday's ruling was unrelated to the Trump administration pending invocation of the state secrets privilege, a legal doctrine often used in military cases. The administration has argued that releasing information about the Abrego Garcia matter in open court — or even to the judge in private – could jeopardize national security. Xinis is yet to rule on the state secrets claim. Abrego Garcia's attorneys have argued that the Trump administration has done nothing to return the Maryland construction worker. They say the government is invoking the privilege to hide behind the misconduct of mistakenly deporting him and refusing to bring him back. Abrego Garcia's deportation violated a U.S. immigration judge's order in 2019 that shielded Abrego Garcia from expulsion to his native country. The immigration judge determined that Abrego Garcia faced likely persecution by a local Salvadoran gang that terrorized his family. Abrego Garcia's American wife sued over his deportation. Xinis ordered his return on April 4. The Supreme Court ruled on April 10 that the administration must work to bring him back. President Donald Trump told ABC News in late April that he could retrieve Abrego Garcia with a phone call to El Salvador's president. But Trump said he wouldn't do it because Abrego Garcia is a member of the MS-13 gang, an allegation that Abrego Garcia denies and for which he was never charged.
