◆ Civil rights bill gets approval from first committee.
New Mexicans who want the right to sue governmental agencies and employees in state District Court for perceived infringements of their constitutional rights got one step closer to their goal Monday.
The House State Government, Elections and Indian Affairs Committee voted 5-3 to approve legislation creating the New Mexico Civil Rights Act, which would allow such legal actions.
Though New Mexico residents can file such claims in federal courts, House Bill 4 would allow them to do so in state District Court and remove the legal doctrine of qualified immunity as a defense.
Qualified immunity can shield law enforcement officers from being held personally liable for actions that are found to violate a person’s constitutional rights.
The bill also provides a three-year statute of limitations on such court actions and allows plaintiffs to ask for compensatory, but not punitive, damages.
The goal, said Rep. Georgene Louis, D-Albuquerque and co-sponsor of the bill, is to ensure “fair, just and equitable treatment … regardless of class, color or background.”
The newly formed New Mexico Civil Rights Commission, initiated just last summer, recommended the action.
Albuquerque attorney Mark Baker, a member of the commission, told committee members the bill would help fill a gap that denies residents the right to file such complaints in state courts.
Supporters of the bill say it will do away with the qualified immunity provision that they say stymies legal efforts to hold law enforcement officers accountable.
Rikki-Lee Chavez, who spoke in favor of the bill on behalf of the New Mexico Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, said qualified immunity is like a “Get Out of Jail Free” card for law enforcement.
Others gave more personal testimony in supporting the bill.
Elaine Maestas, the sister of a New Mexico woman suffering from mental illness who was shot over 20 times by police officers in 2019, said it is “unbelievable that police are entrusted with the power to make life-and-death decisions and yet they are held to some of the lowest standards when it comes to accountability.”
But others said the bill does nothing to address such problems or violations in advance. A.J. Forte, executive director of the New Mexico Municipal League, said while the state should enact more police reform legislation, it doesn’t need “just another way to get sued.”
James Martin, a judge in the Third Judicial District Court in Las Cruces, said the bill also could be construed to allow people to sue judges for the decisions they make.
“A judge should not have to fear that unsatisfied litigants may hound him with litigation charging corruption or malice,” he said. “About half the people who leave my courtroom are dissatisfied. Sometimes everyone is dissatisfied. If every defendant in criminal case were to sue me for my decisions, I think the judiciary would be paralyzed.”
Some lawmakers said they are open to clarifying the language of the bill to ensure that doesn’t happen. Some Republicans on the committee questioned whether the legislation would lead to more court cases and higher insurance or reinsurance costs for agencies that are sued.
The bill’s fiscal impact report estimates the bill, if passed into law, would increase civil rights cases filed in the state from 284 to 421 per year. It says it would cost an average of $7 million a year in additional legal fees for plaintiffs and increased settlements or judgements, among other costs.
The 5-3 committee vote went along party lines, with Democrats on the committee supporting it and Republicans opposing it. It now moves to the House Judiciary Committee.