The New Mexico Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to hear an appeal from three Republicans who sought to invalidate Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s signature universal childcare initiative, an action that leaves intact lower-court rulings that already found against the challengers.
Unanimous refusal ends the latest legal bid
All five justices agreed to deny the appeal, according to an order filed Wednesday. The lawsuit had been brought in April by Duke Rodriguez, Zac Anaya and state Sen. Steve Lanier (R-Aztec). The trio argued the governor violated the state’s separation of powers when she announced and began implementing the universal childcare program.
The challengers first lost at the district court level in June and then asked the state’s highest court to review that decision. With the Supreme Court’s order, there is no further active avenue in state court reported in the filings.
Administration framed suit as political grumbling, not a legal threat
Lawyers for Lujan Grisham’s administration told courts that the Legislature had already directed the Early Childhood Education and Care Department to broaden eligibility for childcare assistance. In their response, they characterized the GOP challenge as more of a political complaint than a legitimate legal claim.
After the Supreme Court action, the governor celebrated the outcome on social media and took aim at one of the plaintiffs. In a post, she declared the program secure and reminded voters of several political defeats suffered by one challenger.
“This candidate lost in state District Court, lost in the Supreme Court and lost his bid to become the next governor of our state,” she wrote. “This means universal childcare in New Mexico is here to stay, and families have no more reason to fear that this life‑changing program will be stripped away from them.”
What the challengers say
Duke Rodriguez, who previously sought the Republican nomination for governor, said Thursday he was disappointed with the court’s order and called for a written opinion explaining the justices’ reasoning. Rodriguez has publicly cited a decades‑old state Supreme Court case that he says is relevant to the authority of executive branch officials to begin programs.
In statements tied to this litigation, Rodriguez referenced his own government service in the late 1990s and alleged that the court’s action represented an erosion of traditional checks among branches of state government.
Practical effect for families and the state
With the legal challenge effectively closed, the administration’s universal childcare program remains in place. The governor framed the Supreme Court’s decision as an affirmation that the program will continue serving families without the immediate prospect of judicially ordered dismantling.
- Program status: Implementation continues following court order.
- Plaintiffs: Duke Rodriguez, Zac Anaya, Sen. Steve Lanier.
- Court action: District Court loss in June; state Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal.
Legal and political context
The case raised a broader constitutional question about the division of authority in Santa Fe between the governor’s office and the Legislature. The administration’s defense relied on prior legislative directives to the Early Childhood Education and Care Department to expand childcare assistance, positioning the program as consistent with statutory intent rather than a unilateral executive overreach.
For opponents, the concern was the executive branch initiating or accelerating policy changes without explicit, contemporaneous legislative authorization. The district court ruling in June sided with the administration, and the Supreme Court’s decision to deny review now forestalls further state-court scrutiny — at least for this set of claims.
Looking ahead
With the judicial route exhausted, any further challenges to the universal childcare initiative would likely take political or legislative forms: attempts to modify funding or program rules at the Roundhouse, or federal litigation if any federal issues were later identified. For now, the policy remains as implemented by the state’s Early Childhood Education and Care Department.
| Item | Outcome |
|---|---|
| District Court (June) | Challengers lost |
| State Supreme Court (July) | Declined to hear appeal (order denying review) |
The case will be remembered in New Mexico politics as an early and dramatic test of how far the governor can go in executing ambitious social policy initiatives without fresh legislative enactments. For families enrolled or awaiting enrollment, the immediate takeaway is stability: the program remains in place after the state’s highest court declined to intervene.
— Elias Trujillo, NEXO RADAR
