Lawmakers debate malpractice limits as session deadline nears in New Mexico.
New Mexico lawmakers are moving quickly on a revised medical malpractice bill as the end of the legislative session approaches, setting up a tense debate over damage caps, hospital accountability, and access to care. The proposal, House Bill 99, would place limits on punitive damages in malpractice cases while allowing higher caps for large hospital systems than for smaller providers. Supporters say changes are needed to keep doctors practicing in the state, while critics warn the bill could reduce justice for patients harmed by medical mistakes.
The House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Christine Chandler, voted unanimously to advance the bill after removing an amendment that would have left punitive damages uncapped for corporate hospitals. Under the current version, punitive damage caps would be based on provider type. Independent doctors would face a cap of roughly $900,000, outpatient clinics about $1 million, and locally owned hospitals around $6 million. Large hospital systems and hospital-controlled clinics would face higher limits, set at two and a half times the cap for local hospitals. The bill also raises the standard required for juries to award punitive damages.
Chandler said the updated bill reflects ongoing negotiations and attempts to balance competing concerns. She acknowledged that neither trial attorneys nor hospitals are fully satisfied but described the measure as a reasonable compromise. According to Chandler, smaller hospitals, such as 25-bed rural facilities, would fall under lower caps, while major hospital networks would face higher exposure due to their size and reach.
Medical malpractice reform has become one of the most debated issues of the session. Supporters argue that high malpractice payouts and rising insurance costs have worsened New Mexico’s doctor shortage, especially in rural areas. They say damage limits could reduce financial risk for providers and make the state more attractive to physicians considering where to practice. Opponents counter that there is little proof the changes would bring more doctors to the state and argue that instituting damage caps shifts the burden onto injured patients and families.
Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has voiced strong support for HB 99. A spokesperson said the governor backs the bill and has made malpractice reform a priority in the final year of her term. The governor has also indicated a willingness to call a special legislative session if needed to reach a final agreement, signaling the issue is far from settled.
Time, however, is becoming a major factor. With less than a week left in the session, the bill still needs approval from the full House and the Senate. Senator Joseph Cervantes, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the Senate may not wait for the House to act. Cervantes, a personal injury attorney, noted that negotiations in the House have taken weeks and warned that the Senate could introduce its own version rather than accept a bill at the last minute.
Cervantes expressed concern about being forced into a quick decision without enough time for review. He rejected claims that lawyers in the Legislature benefit from uncapped damages, calling that idea a misconception. According to Cervantes, attorneys serve on judiciary committees because their legal background helps shape clearer and more workable laws. He also said a special session could allow lawmakers to focus fully on finding a lasting approach to lowering malpractice insurance costs.
House leaders pushed back on concerns about timing. Chandler said the House has often handled complex Senate bills with little notice and believes the Senate can do the same. House Speaker Javier Martínez urged lawmakers to avoid blaming either doctors or trial lawyers for the state’s healthcare problems. He said both groups have been treated unfairly in the debate and called for a more respectful discussion focused on solutions.
At the center of the dispute is how punitive damages should be handled. Unlike compensatory damages, which are meant to cover actual harm, punitive damages are designed to punish wrongdoing. Currently, New Mexico does not cap punitive damages in malpractice cases. HB 99 would change that, adding limits and increasing the burden of proof needed to award them. Supporters say this protects providers from extreme financial risk, while opponents argue it weakens accountability for serious misconduct.
As lawmakers race against the clock, the outcome remains uncertain. Whether HB 99 moves forward, stalls, or triggers a special session, the debate highlights a deep divide over how New Mexico should balance patient rights, hospital responsibility, and access to medical care. What happens next could shape the state’s healthcare system for years to come.
Sources:
House faces medical malpractice bill with higher caps for big hospitals
NM House committee unanimously passes medical-malpractice reform
Join the conversation!