Civil Rights Act could face opposition
Proposal would not allow qualified immunity defense in state claims
SANTA FE — A proposed New Mexico Civil Rights Act, which would allow legal claims to be filed in state court over alleged infringements of free speech, freedom of religion and other constitutional rights, could generate fierce debate during the upcoming 60-day legislative session.
The proposed law would not allow the legal doctrine of qualified immunity to be used as a defense in such cases, following a path already taken by Colorado and other states.
However, individual law enforcement officers and other types of public officials would not be personally liable to pay any courtordered damages. Instead, such damages would be paid by the public agency or body that employs the defendant, as is currently the practice under state law.
Retired state Supreme Court Justice Richard Bosson, chairman of the state’s Civil Rights Commission, has said the proposed law would “provide a legal vehicle for New Mexico citizens to fully enforce rights granted them by the New Mexico Constitution without importing artificial obstacles to the truth-seeking process such as qualified immunity.”
Qualified immunity is a legal principle that shields government officials — including police officers — from lawsuits except in cases where a plaintiff can prove that officials violated their “clearly established” rights, a high legal threshold that leads to many cases being dismissed.
The Civil Rights Commission was created under a bill passed by lawmakers during a June special session that was signed into law by Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham.
The nine-member commission includes attorneys, judges and law enforcement officials. Its members were appointed by the governor and legislative leaders.
After holding multiple meetings during which commission members heard testimony on legal and law enforcement issues, the commission voted 5-4 to endorse the proposed Civil Rights Act and 6-3 to bar qualified immunity from being used as a defense.
Those who voted in opposition predicted the law would lead to law enforcement officers leaving New Mexico and to an increase in local governments’ insurance costs, a concern shared by the New Mexico Association of Counties and several lawmakers.
“The last thing we want to do here is pass an act that makes the cities and counties uninsurable,” said Sen. Joseph Cervantes, D-Las Cruces.
But House Speaker Brian Egolf, D-Santa Fe, has said he supports the proposed Civil Rights Act and will push for its passage during the upcoming session.
“I think giving New Mexicans the ability to vindicate their constitutional rights in a New Mexico courtroom is of fundamental importance,” Egolf told the Journal.
He also said he would strive to make sure public employees’ concerns about the proposed new law — including increased insurance rates — are addressed.
Under the proposed law, claims of constitutional rights deprivations would be filed in state District Courts around New Mexico. Currently, such claims can be filed in federal court but not in state courts.
Meanwhile, all public bodies would have to keep a file of all judgments and settlements under the proposed Civil Rights Act, and make such records available under the state’s Inspection of Public Records Act.