Bolen v. New Mexico Racing Commission

The New Mexico Racing Commission, a state administrative agency regulating New Mexico’s horse racing industry, initiated an administrative disciplinary action against a licensed horse trainer, alleging violations of regulations prohibiting conduct that adversely reflects on the integrity of horse racing. The trainer filed a claim under the New Mexico Civil Rights Act against the Commission, alleging violations of his state constitutional rights to free speech and due process. He claimed that the Commission’s disciplinary proceeding against him was “vindictive prosecution” that retaliated against his protected speech addressed to a racing steward and for a previous, unrelated lawsuit he had filed against the Commission’s Executive Director.
The Supreme Court of New Mexico held that judicial immunity is an affirmative defense available to public bodies sued under the state’s Civil Rights Act, and that a claim of judicial immunity may extend to individuals and government entities performing quasi-judicial functions in the executive branch. To make that determination, it said, courts must consider both (1) whether the adjudicatory proceeding shares enough characteristics of the judicial process to warrant the extension of judicial immunity to the proceeding and (2) whether the conduct at issue consists of a judicial function. The court remanded the case to the trial court to consider whether the Commission is entitled to such immunity under the applied framework.