New Mexico’s highest court has backed a state policy that places drug-exposed newborns into protective custody at birth. The ruling deals a significant blow to civil liberties groups and legislators who sought to block the measure.

On Monday, the New Mexico Supreme Court unanimously rejected an emergency petition by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of New Mexico. Two Democratic lawmakers joined the effort: Senator Linda López of Albuquerque and Representative Micaela Lara Cadena of Mesilla. They wanted the court to suspend the practice immediately. Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham introduced the directive in July 2025.

What the Drug-Exposed Newborns Policy Requires

Under the governor’s directive, drug-exposed newborns who test positive for fentanyl, methamphetamine, or other dangerous substances must stay in hospital for treatment. They cannot leave until staff arrange a safe environment. The New Mexico Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD) takes custody of each child for at least 72 hours.

CYFD must file an abuse and neglect petition before any newborn leaves hospital. If a child returns to their parents, the department conducts regular welfare check-ins.

The Scale of the Problem

The numbers behind the policy are stark. The New Mexico Department of Justice reports that an average of 1,266 babies were born exposed to illegal drugs each year between 2020 and 2023. For a state of just over 2 million people, that is a serious public health burden.

Before the governor’s directive, many drug-exposed newborns went home with their parents. That approach aimed to reunite families and comply with the federal Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (CARA). But several high-profile infant deaths followed. The governor pointed to those deaths as the driving reason for the change.

Since the directive took effect, CYFD spokesperson Jake Thompson confirmed that 213 newborns tested positive for illegal substances at birth. All are now in safe care. Not a single child covered by the directive has died.

Supporters Hail the Ruling on Babies Born Exposed to Drugs

Those who pushed for stricter protections for babies born exposed to drugs welcomed Monday’s outcome.

Maralyn Beck is executive director of New Mexico Child First Network, a foster care advocacy organisation and a long-standing CYFD critic. She said the result brought her real relief. “Since the governor stood strong and made this directive, no child that has fallen under this directive has died,” she said. “In my opinion, there is no metric that is more important than children not dying.”

CYFD’s Thompson said the decision would “help keep babies safe.” He added that it lets the department keep working with families, medical professionals, courts, law enforcement, and partner agencies to give drug-exposed newborns a real chance.

Critics Argue the Policy Punishes Families

Not everyone agrees. The ACLU challenged the policy directly, arguing that removing babies born exposed to drugs from their mothers without individual assessment breaches parents’ constitutional right to due process.

The organisation warned that a zero-tolerance approach could make things worse. It said the policy “causes the very harm it purports to prevent.” Stigma and fear, the ACLU argued, push expectant mothers away from prenatal care. Some may travel out of state to give birth. Others may hide their health history from doctors. Both outcomes put mother and child at greater risk.

Some legislators share those concerns. Former state Senator Gerald Ortiz y Pino called the approach punitive. He said it stigmatises families already battling addiction. Other advocates warned the policy adds more strain to a foster care system that was already under pressure well before the directive arrived.

The Bigger Picture: Pregnancy, Drugs and Child Safety

This ruling reflects a broader national debate. On one side sit child safeguarding priorities. On the other are the rights of parents whose substance use has affected their pregnancies. Public health researchers caution that punitive measures can push pregnant women with addiction away from the care they need. That can worsen outcomes for both mother and baby.

Child protection advocates, though, point to real dangers for babies born exposed to drugs. Those risks include neonatal abstinence syndrome, long-term developmental difficulties, and preventable deaths when there is no oversight.

The Supreme Court’s decision keeps CYFD’s approach in place. The legal and legislative debate will continue. For now, all drug-exposed newborns in New Mexico enter protective custody at birth while the state works to find them a safe home.

Source: dbrecoveryresources