New Mexico courts apply a federal burden-shifting test to decide employment retaliation claims brought under the New Mexico Human Rights Act (NMHRA). In New Mexico courts’ application of this test, it is unclear whether the employee has to initially show whether the protected activity she engaged in—such as filing a discrimination complaint—was the “but-for” cause of the adverse employment action against her, or if it is sufficient for her to show that the protected activity was one motivating factor—among other potentially lawful or non-discriminatory factors—that contributed to the employer’s retaliatory acts against her. In light of the recent United States Supreme Court case that requires a but-for causation standard for employment retaliation claims brought under federal law, it is critical that New Mexico courts clarify the causation standard that plaintiffs must satisfy in employment retaliation claims brought under the NMHRA. This Comment argues that New Mexico courts should adopt a motivating factor causation standard in NMHRA retaliation claims. A motivating factor causation standard best comports with the purpose of the federal burden-shifting framework; New Mexico caselaw on state-based discrimination and retaliation claims; the statutory structure of the NMHRA; and the ultimate anti-discriminatory purpose of the NMHRA.

Included in

Law Commons



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.