New Mexico becomes third state to end qualified immunity, joining Colorado and Connecticut in restricting police protections from civil rights lawsuits.
New Mexico has officially ended qualified immunity, making it the third state to curb the legal doctrine that often shields state actors from accountability for alleged misconduct.
Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham on Wednesday signed House Bill 4, which will prohibit all government officials from using a qualified immunity defense in state civil court.
The doctrine remains in place at the federal level, though it has been the topic of much debate since the May 2020 police killing of George Floyd. New Mexico’s law will allow victims of government malfeasance to pursue recourse through state litigation.
Qualified immunity protects public servants from civil rights lawsuits unless their misbehavior was “clearly established” somewhere in case law prior to the alleged offense. Though it was supposed to serve as a bulwark against frivolous lawsuits, the principle has become so broad that it enables rogue government workers to skirt civil accountability for overtly unethical behavior.
There were the cops who got qualified immunity for allegedly stealing $225,000 while carrying out a search warrant. There was the cop who shot a 10-year-old while aiming at the boy’s nonthreatening dog. There was the cop who shot a 15-year-old who was on his way to school. There were the cops who arrested and assaulted a man for the crime of standing outside of his own house. According to the doctrine of qualified immunity, we could not expect those officials to know their behavior was wrong unless a court decision with almost identical factual circumstances existed somewhere on the books. It’s quite the low standard.
“When you’ve got someone who has a valid claim against a police officer, but there’s no existing precedent where that exact same thing has already happened,” says Clark Neily, vice president for criminal justice reform at the Cato Institute, “then the New Mexico law will give them an alternative avenue to pursue that claim in a court system that is not going to throw the case out simply because there doesn’t happen to be a pre-existing case exactly on point….[It] will certainly enable victims of civil rights violations to hold police accountable in circumstances where they would not otherwise have been able to before the law was passed.”
While some victims are able to furnish the perfect court precedent and are thus allowed to pursue their claims, not all plaintiffs are so lucky.
As expected, the law enforcement lobby resisted the change—a good barometer for how effective this new policy might be.
It will be interesting to see if cases gravitate to New Mexico state court that would formerly have been brought in New Mexico federal court. I don’t know enough — or, indeed, anything — about the applicable New Mexico state law and how plaintiff-friendly it is, qualified immunity aside, to make a prediction.Report
Given the issues with Albuquerque PD, I’m surprised this made it to the governors desk.
Happy it did, just surprised.Report
It might be that it’s considered a way to get rid of problems with the Albuquerque PD.
An expensive, painful, long, suboptimal fix.
But repeated kicks to the wallet might do what nothing else could.Report
I have been told that ending QI won’t result in anything changing.
You’d think that this would be a point in favor of ending QI rather than a defense against changing it.
I hope it results in change and I hope the changes are good.
But, honestly, it’ll be years before we can really say one way or the other.
This is a good first step.Report