NM Supreme Court lays out scope of legislative immunity in precendent-setting ruling

SANTA FE — The motive behind New Mexico lawmakers’ official acts is irrelevant when it comes to determining whether they can be the target of lawsuits, the state Supreme Court ruled Monday.

The unanimous ruling by the state’s highest court establishes — for the first time — the scope of legislative immunity, a doctrine that protects legislators from facing legal claims over their job-related actions.

It comes nearly five months after the Supreme Court ordered the dismissal of a lawsuit filed against the state Senate’s top-ranking Democrat by a former senator who alleged he had been illegally retaliated against. The court indicated at the time it planned to issue a longer written ruling at a later date.

The top Democrat, Senate President Pro Tem Mimi Stewart of Albuquerque, had asked the Supreme Court to intervene after a state District Court judge denied Stewart’s initial motion to dismiss the case, saying her motives needed to be scrutinized.

The case was filed by ex-Sen. Jacob Candelaria of Albuquerque in April 2022, several months before he resigned from the Senate.

In his lawsuit, he argued Stewart violated the state’s Human Rights Act by moving his Senate seat and Capitol office location following his criticism of her behind-the-scenes handling of a personnel investigation involving a top legislative staffer.

However, the New Mexico Supreme Court in its Monday opinion ruled that Stewart was shielded by legislative immunity since her actions involved legislative resources and that her motive, or intent, for moving Candelaria’s seat and office location was not relevant.

“When legislative immunity applies, recourse is found not in the courts, but at the ballot box,” Supreme Court Chief Justice David Thomson wrote in the court’s ruling, which also cited cases in other states.

The Supreme Court also ordered District Court Judge Daniel Ramczyk of Albuquerque to dismiss Candelaria’s original complaint.

While New Mexico’s legislative immunity provision had been largely untested in the courts, the similar issue of presidential immunity has been a hot-button issue.

The U.S. Supreme Court in July 2024 ruled that former presidents can not be criminally prosecuted for acts taken while in office. The ruling hinged on the actions of Donald Trump, who then won election last November to a new four-year term.

Specifically, New Mexico’s Constitution says legislators shall not be “questioned in any other place for any speech or debate or for any vote cast in either house.”

The state Constitution also protects lawmakers from arrest during legislative sessions, with certain exceptions.

In all, 43 states including New Mexico have constitutions that provide legislative immunity by protecting legislators from executive or judicial action, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.