By: Austin Fisher, Source New Mexico
State government entities in New Mexico that act like courts when they resolve disputes can claim immunity from civil rights lawsuits, the state’s highest court ruled earlier this month in its first interpretation of the 2021 New Mexico Civil Rights Act.
However, the New Mexico Court of Appeals must still figure out whether the state’s horse racing regulator was acting like a court when it disciplined a horse trainer in the summer of 2021.
The New Mexico Supreme Court on June 2 ruled that state government entities sued under the New Mexico Civil Rights Act can claim “judicial immunity,” but stopped short of saying whether the New Mexico Racing Commission is immune from civil rights claims in this particular case.
The justices laid out a framework for determining when agencies under the state’s executive branch can use the defense against claims stemming from “quasi-judicial adjudicatory proceedings,” like disciplinary action.
Joshua Kastenberg, a law professor at the University of New Mexico, told Source NM the Supreme Court’s ruling preserves the law as the Legislature intended it.
“They wanted to make sure that the citizens would keep the state government accountable, except in the judicial arena,” Kastenberg said in a phone interview on Thursday. “So it’s a victory for all New Mexicans, but I don’t know if we can immediately say it’s going to benefit people other than it’s going to maintain that important balance of a functioning government and government accountability.”
Dispute over horse trainer’s license
Horse trainer Bradley Bolen alleges the Racing Commission violated his state constitutional rights by pursuing a vindictive prosecution against him. He argues the commission disciplined him in retaliation for advocating that his assistant trainer Isidro Rodriguez’s license be reinstated in July 2021.
Bolen alleged that Ron Walker, chief steward of racing at Ruidoso Downs, and Director Izzy Trejo initiated disciplinary proceedings against him, and ultimately imposed a $500 fine that was suspended so long as he didn’t receive any more discipline for a year.
Bolen appealed to the board of stewards but, before the administrative hearing on his appeal, he filed a civil rights complaint in district court and withdrew his appeal.
The Racing Commission argued that when it disciplined Bolen, it was acting like a court, which entitled it to immunity from his civil rights claims. This is called a “quasi-judicial immunity” defense.
District Court Judge Joshua Allison ruled that the commission isn’t entitled to quasi-judicial immunity, and the commission appealed. Then the New Mexico Court of Appeals reversed and ruled that government entities can use this kind of defense in general, and the commission can use it in this case.
High court’s first swing at landmark law
The federal government and the United States’ 50 state governments have sovereign immunity, which means they cannot be sued unless lawmakers open up avenues to lawsuits, said Kastenberg, who teaches constitutional law, criminal law and evidence.
When the New Mexico Legislature wrote the state Tort Claims Act during the 20th century, it kept in place immunities that already existed, including judicial immunity, which is meant to protect judges from being sued for damages as a result of an allegedly corrupt decision, Kastenberg said.
“A judge, on the federal side or the state side, is supposed to be able to make their rulings free from the fear of public pressure or litigation, so that although their rulings may be wrong, they’re not pressured into making those rulings,” Kastenberg said.
In April 2021, New Mexico became one of the first states in the country to abolish qualified immunity through the New Mexico Civil Rights Act, making it possible for people to sue police officers and others in state court for constitutional rights violations.
This month’s ruling was the first time ever that the Supreme Court has interpreted the Civil Rights Act, the justices wrote. The new law preserved other kinds of immunity defenses, including judicial immunity, they wrote.
The justices sent the case back down to the lower court in order to analyze whether the Racing Commission was acting like a court when it pursued discipline against Bolen.
If the court finds that the Racing Commission wasn’t acting like a court, then it would be open to a lawsuit under the state Civil Rights Act, Kastenberg said.
“Bowen did not win in the sense that he hasn’t proven his civil rights were violated,” Kastenberg said. “He only won in the sense that he gets to have his day in court.”
This story originally published online at sourcenm.com and was reprinted with permission
