Franklin v. Martinez
What's at Stake
This case raises the question whether New Mexico courts should retire their current, federal-centric approach to interpreting the New Mexico Constitution—a method known as the “interstitial approach”—and embrace an independent approach that would allow them to more readily diverge from federal courts in light of New Mexico’s own law, history, and values. The Court’s decision could have major implications for New Mexicans’ ability to vindicate their state constitutional rights.
Summary
Bryce Franklin, who is incarcerated, requested permission to buy personal items from a state-approved vendor. But the prison denied his request after the warden instructed staff to approve only orders from a single favored supplier. Mr. Franklin challenged the denial in state court, arguing that it violated his state constitutional right to “acquire property,” read in conjunction with his right to due process.
Shortly before oral argument, the New Mexico Supreme Court issued an order asking Mr. Franklin’s counsel to address whether the Court should overrule its current approach to interpreting the New Mexico Constitution, called the “interstitial approach,” and if so, what approach it should adopt instead. The interstitial approach requires New Mexico courts to look to federal jurisprudence before analyzing the state constitution itself, and to adopt independent interpretations of the New Mexico Constitution only if they can justify departing from federal precedent.
But in our system of federalism, state courts are not bound by federal precedents when interpreting their own state constitutions. We tendered an amicus brief with the ACLU of New Mexico and the Brennan Center for Justice to urge the Court to replace the interstitial approach with an independent one. Under an independent approach, state courts would look first to the New Mexico Constitution and interpret it in light of New Mexico’s distinctive law, history, and values.
In our amicus brief, we argue that the interstitial approach itself was a first step on the road to state constitutional independence, but it shouldn’t be the final stop. The Court has now developed a robust body of case law interpreting the New Mexico Constitution independently, so it no longer needs to rely on federal law. Nor should it: the structure of the New Mexico Constitution—with many provisions that lack analogues in the U.S. Constitution—and the values underlying our system of federalism support adopting a truly independent approach to state constitutional interpretation.
Legal Documents
-
12/19/2025
ACLU and ACLU-NM Amicus Brief
Date Filed: 12/19/2025
Court: New Mexico Supreme Court
Affiliate: New Mexico
Download Document