sa国际传媒官网网页入口

The state Supreme Court on Monday declined to halt the nearly year-old gubernatorial policy designed to prevent drug-exposed newborns in New Mexico from being discharged to unsafe home environments.

Without comment, the justices unanimously denied a petition from the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico and two state legislators seeking an emergency order on the grounds that the practice is unlawful and causing irreparable harm.

The petition sought to prohibit the state Children, Youth and Families Department from taking custody of such infants at hospitals and immediately filing abuse and neglect petitions against their parents in court.

More than 130 infants have entered foster care or other suitable placements since Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham instituted the directive on July 7.

"The drugs devastating our families today demand a different response from state government," Lujan Grisham said in a statement issued Monday afternoon.

"My executive order is part of that response 鈥� and it has already saved lives. The order is designed as a temporary structure to protect our most vulnerable children, not as a punishment of their parents," the Democratic governor added.

The ACLU did not immediately comment on the Supreme Court's decision Monday afternoon when contacted by the Journal.

The Governor's Office maintains the policy has improved the lives of children who are "recovering today because CYFD was able to investigate substance-exposure reports promptly and uncover the serious risks that lay beneath the surface," according to court documents filed by Lujan Grisham's office.

The ACLU contends that parents whose newborns were taken into state custody were denied due process and argues the practice is unconstitutional.

Before July 2025, CYFD did not automatically take custody of and investigate newborns identified by hospital workers as drug-exposed. Instead, infants could go home under safety plans, and CYFD would investigate only if it received a separate report of abuse or neglect.

One reason: Unlike at least 24 other states, New Mexico does not consider infants abused or neglected solely because of prenatal drug exposure, the ACLU stated in its petition seeking an emergency stay.

"Under this zero-tolerance policy," the ACLU argued, "newborns are removed from their parents at birth, deprived of developmentally crucial bonding time, and ushered into a system with a proven lack of capacity to provide adequate care."

In court filings, the state argued the governor acted in response to past tragedies, including the death of a 1-month-old boy born exposed to amphetamines, fentanyl and marijuana. The infant was found dead, face down on a heating pad in his crib, in January 2025. Months earlier, another substance-exposed infant suffered a fractured leg at just 3 months old.

The Governor's Office also argued that the ACLU, state Rep. Micaela Cadena, D-Mesilla, and state Sen. Linda Lopez, D-sa国际传媒官网网页入口, lacked standing to bring the case. It further argued that parents can challenge removals through Children's Court proceedings.

"The Directive makes the substance-exposed newborn's health and safety the 'paramount concern' by utilizing existing authority to give CYFD the time to investigate and ensure that an infant can safely remain in the care of the parent who exposed them to a dangerous drug, multiple drugs or large amounts of alcohol 鈥� as opposed to simply letting the baby go and 'hoping for the best,'" Lujan Grisham and CYFD stated in their response.

Maralyn Beck, founder and executive director of the nonprofit New Mexico Child First Network, told the Journal: "We are relieved, if not overjoyed, to see the Supreme Court deny this petition. The governor's directive is working ... lives have been saved."

The ACLU argued: "Under this zero-tolerance policy, newborns are removed from their parents at birth, deprived of developmentally crucial bonding time, and ushered into a system with a proven lack of capacity to provide adequate care."