NM Supreme Court declines Albuquerque’s appeal in encampments case

The city of Albuquerque, backed by the city of Rio Rancho and the 2nd Judicial District Attorney’s Office, hoped to convince the state Supreme Court to intervene in a pending lawsuit alleging the unconstitutional enforcement of public camping laws against the involuntarily homeless population.

Lawyers for the city argued that a lower court ruling in the case was “egregiously flawed” and should be reversed because it would result in “significant and immediate harm.” But the judge in the case cautioned that he hadn’t ruled on the merits and only issued a pre-trial ruling while the case proceeds.

The state Supreme Court denied the city’s request last Thursday, without explanation. The next day, the city appealed another order of state District Judge Joshua Allison to the state Court of Appeals, protesting his Oct. 2 decision certifying the lawsuit as a class action.

“We are so grateful for the outcome of the Supreme Court decision,” said Kristin Greer Love, an attorney representing eight plaintiffs who are or have been homeless. “It allows the case to proceed to trial in October 2026 so that the court can hear all the evidence and make a decision.”

An attorney for the city of Albuquerque didn’t have an immediate comment for this story Tuesday.

The ruling that spurred the city’s emergency request to the Supreme Court was Allison’s decision earlier this year to permit attorneys for the unhoused to argue at a future trial that the city’s policy violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment when the homeless person has no place else to stay.

The plaintiffs “and thousands of other people exist outdoors with their belongings on public property in Albuquerque because they have no means to pay for housing and the City of Albuquerque lacks adequate and sufficient shelter,” stated the plaintiffs’ response to the Supreme Court.

“The City orders people to move from place to place, threatening to destroy their life-sustaining belongings — wheelchairs, tents, blankets, food, water and clothing — without a warrant or adequate notice, a pre-or-post-deprivation hearing, or an opportunity to reclaim what is theirs,” the response stated.

The city of Albuquerque asked the Supreme Court to reverse Allison’s ruling, in which he denied the city’s motion to dismiss the cruel and unusual punishment claim from the lawsuit.

“If allowed to stand, the district court’s decision will leave the City of Albuquerque and cities and towns throughout New Mexico, with no means to prevent the proliferation of encampments within their borders. Because the district court’s opinion is egregiously flawed and will result in significant and immediate harm, the city asks this court to exercise its power to take superintending control over this matter...,” stated the city’s request.

Bernalillo County District Attorney Sam Bregman’s office filed a response supporting the city of Albuquerque, as did the city of Rio Rancho.

They contended Allison erred last March in agreeing with the lawyers for the unhoused that a 2024 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson, was flawed in concluding that local governments could enforce use-of-space ordinances against the unhoused without violating their Eighth Amendment’s cruel and unusual punishment protections. That ruling was lauded by cities and other municipalities around the country.

But Allison found that New Mexico’s state Constitution provides for greater protection against cruel and unusual punishment claims than was considered by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The judge filed a response to the Supreme Court stating that his ruling did not adopt a “specific legal standard.” He added that the city’s suggestion that he would side with the plaintiffs on the issue in the future was “premature.”

In the new request to the Court of Appeals, lawyers for the city allege that Allison certified three classes of unhoused plaintiffs without conducting the “rigorous analysis that New Mexico law demands.”

The approved classes are all current and future unhoused people involuntarily living outdoors in the city of Albuquerque; all current and future unhoused people living outdoors; and all persons living at the now-closed Coronado Park north of Downtown between Aug. 3, 2022, and Aug. 17, 2022, whose property was seized by the city and not returned.