New Mexico: Anti-SLAPP Laws

The short answer

New Mexico has an anti-SLAPP statute, but a narrow one. NMSA 1978
§ 38-2-9.1, enacted in 2001 and unchanged since, only reaches a lawsuit
seeking money damages over conduct or speech connected to a public
hearing or public meeting in a quasi-judicial proceeding before a state
or local government tribunal — not the broader "any public issue"
coverage most other states' anti-SLAPP laws provide. A defendant uses an
ordinary motion to dismiss, motion for judgment on the pleadings, or
motion for summary judgment, which the court must decide on a priority
or expedited basis. There's no special evidentiary standard and no
automatic discovery stay. What the statute does add is a mandatory
attorney-fee award for a timely, successful motion, and an express right
to an expedited appeal — including when the trial court simply never
rules.

Requirements one by one

Governing law

New Mexico's anti-SLAPP law is NMSA 1978 §§ 38-2-9.1 and 38-2-9.2,
enacted in 2001 and never amended since. It's a narrow, purpose-built
statute focused specifically on quasi-judicial government proceedings —
not a version of the newer Uniform Public Expression Protection Act or
the broader California/Texas models other states have adopted.

What speech or conduct is protected

The statute applies only to a lawsuit seeking money damages over conduct
or speech connected to a "public hearing or public meeting in a
quasi-judicial proceeding" before a tribunal or decision-making body of
a state or local political subdivision. The statute's own definition
lists meetings or presentations before state, city, town, or village
councils, planning commissions, or review boards or commissions. New
Mexico courts have read "quasi-judicial proceeding" to reach comparable
state-agency disciplinary hearings — for example, a state racing
commission's board-of-stewards disciplinary proceeding — but this is a
much narrower category than the general public-forum or
public-issue speech most other states' anti-SLAPP laws cover.

The special motion procedure

There's no statutory deadline for filing the motion itself. A defendant
instead uses whichever existing motion type fits — a motion to dismiss,
a motion for judgment on the pleadings, or a motion for summary judgment —
and the statute requires the court to consider it "on a priority or
expedited basis" to avoid unnecessary litigation expense. Unlike most
other states' anti-SLAPP statutes, New Mexico's doesn't automatically
stay discovery while the motion is pending.

Burden of proof

New Mexico's statute doesn't create its own special evidentiary test.
It's a scheduling and fee-shifting statute layered on top of ordinary
motion practice: whichever standard normally governs the motion type
chosen — the ordinary pleading-sufficiency standard for a motion to
dismiss, or the ordinary genuine-issue-of-material-fact standard for
summary judgment — is what the court actually applies, just on an
accelerated timeline.

Attorney's fees

The fee award is conditionally mandatory. If the § 38-2-9.1 defense is
raised and the court grants a motion to dismiss, for judgment on the
pleadings, or for summary judgment that was filed within 90 days of the
moving party's answer, the court must award the moving party reasonable
attorney fees and costs. Separately, if the court finds that a motion to
dismiss or for summary judgment was frivolous or filed solely to cause
delay, it must award fees and costs to whoever prevailed on the motion.

Right to appeal

Any party has an express statutory right to an expedited appeal from a
trial court's ruling on the motion — or from the trial court's failure
to rule on an expedited basis at all. New Mexico's Court of Appeals has
limited this expedited-appeal jurisdiction to speech-based defenses
raised under this statute (or the related Noerr-Pennington petitioning
doctrine); it doesn't extend to other grounds for dismissal argued
alongside the anti-SLAPP defense in the same motion.

Exemptions

There's no exemptions section carving activity out of the statute's
already-narrow scope. Instead, the statute includes a savings clause:
nothing in it limits or prohibits a party's other constitutional,
statutory, common-law, or administrative rights or remedies, including a
separate civil action for defamation or malicious abuse of process.

What trips people up

This statute covers far less than most other states' anti-SLAPP
laws. It only reaches money-damages claims tied to a public hearing or
meeting in a quasi-judicial government proceeding — a negative online
review of a private business, for instance, generally falls outside its
scope entirely, unlike in states with a broad public-interest catch-all.

There's no automatic discovery stay. Filing the motion doesn't pause
discovery the way it does in most other anti-SLAPP states; the statute
only requires the court to give the motion priority or expedited
consideration.

The fee award depends on filing within 90 days of the answer. The
mandatory fee-shifting provision only applies if the successful motion
was filed within that window — file late, and the fee award may not be
automatic even if the motion succeeds.

The expedited-appeal right is real and statutory, not something you
need case law to find. The statute itself creates the right to an
expedited appeal, including from a court's failure to rule — you don't
need to rely on a general, discretionary interlocutory-appeal procedure
to get appellate review of a denial.

Common questions

Does this cover a lawsuit over a comment I made at a city council
meeting? Likely yes, if the meeting qualifies as a quasi-judicial
proceeding under the statute's definition and the suit seeks money
damages over your comment.

Does this cover a lawsuit over my negative Yelp review? Generally
no — the statute's scope is limited to conduct or speech connected to a
quasi-judicial government proceeding, not general commercial or
consumer-facing speech.

If my motion is denied, can I appeal right away? Yes — the statute
gives any party an express right to an expedited appeal from the ruling,
or from a court's failure to rule on an expedited basis, though New
Mexico courts limit that right to appeals of the speech-based defense
itself.

Statutes and sources

• NMSA 1978 § 38-2-9.1(A) — "Any action seeking money damages
  against a person for conduct or speech undertaken or made in
  connection with a public hearing or public meeting in a quasi-judicial
  proceeding before a tribunal or decision-making body of any political
  subdivision of the state is subject to a special motion to dismiss, a
  motion for judgment on the pleadings, or a motion for summary judgment
  that shall be considered by the court on a priority or expedited
  basis..." Source:
  https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/chapter-38/article-2/section-38-2-9-1/
  (accessed 2026-07-05).
• NMSA 1978 § 38-2-9.1(B) — "If the rights afforded by this section
  are raised as an affirmative defense and if a court grants a motion to
  dismiss, a motion for judgment on the pleadings or a motion for
  summary judgment filed within ninety days of the filing of the moving
  party's answer, the court shall award reasonable attorney fees and
  costs incurred by the moving party in defending the action. If the
  court finds that a special motion to dismiss or motion for summary
  judgment is frivolous or solely intended to cause unnecessary delay,
  the court shall award costs and reasonable attorney fees to the party
  prevailing on the motion." Source:
  https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/chapter-38/article-2/section-38-2-9-1/
  (accessed 2026-07-05).
• NMSA 1978 § 38-2-9.1(C) — "Any party shall have the right to an
  expedited appeal from a trial court order on the special motions
  described in Subsection B of this section or from a trial court's
  failure to rule on the motion on an expedited basis." Source:
  https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/chapter-38/article-2/section-38-2-9-1/
  (accessed 2026-07-05).
• NMSA 1978 § 38-2-9.1(D)-(E) — "D. As used in this section, a
  'public meeting in a quasi-judicial proceeding' means and includes any
  meeting established and held by a state or local governmental entity,
  including without limitations, meetings or presentations before state,
  city, town or village councils, planning commissions, review boards or
  commissions. E. Nothing in this section limits or prohibits the
  exercise of a right or remedy of a party granted pursuant to another
  constitutional, statutory, common law or administrative provision,
  including civil actions for defamation or malicious abuse of process."
  Source: https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/chapter-38/article-2/section-38-2-9-1/
  (accessed 2026-07-05).
• NMSA 1978 § 38-2-9.2 — "The legislature declares that it is the
  public policy of New Mexico to protect the rights of its citizens to
  participate in quasi-judicial proceedings before local and state
  governmental tribunals... These lawsuits should be subject to prompt
  dismissal or judgment to prevent the abuse of the legal process and
  avoid the burden imposed by such baseless lawsuits." Source:
  https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/chapter-38/article-2/section-38-2-9-2/
  (accessed 2026-07-05).