POLISCOPE
Back to bills

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.
Did Not Advance

New Mexico Prohibits Health Entities from Interfering with Clinical Judgment and Establishes Legal Penalties

Original title: HEALTH PROFESSIONAL AUTONOMY ACT

Last action · January 20, 2026: Sent to SCC - Referrals: SCC/SHPAC/SJCSponsors: Pete Campos and 8 others

Introduced
Committee
Floor Vote
Passed
Law

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

Public stanceCommunity reactions are separate from the official record and reporting.

What This Bill Proposed

Senate Bill 16 establishes the Health Professional Autonomy Act, prohibiting health care entities in New Mexico from interfering with or directing the clinical decisions and professional judgment of health care providers, effective July 1, 2026. The measure permits injured individuals to sue in district court for damages, punitive damages, and attorney fees, and authorizes the attorney general to bring enforcement actions for injunctions and restitution.

Why it matters

Health care providers gain legal protections to make autonomous patient care decisions without administrative interference, while hospitals, staffing agencies, and health systems face potential civil lawsuits and enforcement actions by the state attorney general for violating these standards.

Background
  • State Senator Antoinette Sedillo Lopez introduced Senate Bill 16 during the 2026 regular session of the New Mexico Legislature. context

Who It Would Have Affected

Groups the bill's text would have affected, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

Health care providers

Health care providers receive legal protections guaranteeing autonomy in clinical decisions, patient volume limits, and treatment options without interference from health care entities.

Directly affected

Health care entities

Health care entities such as hospitals, health systems, and management services organizations are prohibited from directing provider clinical judgments and face potential civil lawsuits and attorney general enforcement.

Directly affected

Patients

Patients gain the ability to sue health care entities for injuries resulting from corporate interference in their care and are impacted by provider clinical independence.

Key Facts

You don't have to trust us. Each fact below is taken straight from the official document - click any one to see the exact passage, highlighted in the original.

Frequently Asked Questions

What organizations are excluded from the definition of a health care entity?
s and independent health care practices are excluded from the definition of a health care entity under the act.
Can the attorney general seek temporary injunctions without posting a bond?
Yes, the attorney general acting on behalf of the state is not required to post a bond when seeking temporary or permanent injunctions under this act.
What specific clinical decisions are protected from corporate interference?
Protected decisions include determining appropriate diagnostic tests, deciding on referrals or consultations, managing overall patient care and treatment options, and determining how many patients a provider can see in a given time period.

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Where This Stands

This bill did not become law - Died at adjournment · in Senate committee.

Procedural history

1 action
  1. Jan 20, 2026SenateCommittee
    Sent to SCC - Referrals: SCC/SHPAC/SJC

Version history

Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.

View official text →

Lobbying Activity

No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Sponsors

Connected Entities

Peter Wirth, Cindy Nava, Liz Stefanics and 10 more
PersonPeter Wirth“Cosponsor of Senate Bill 16”Map →
PersonCindy Nava“Cosponsor of Senate Bill 16”Map →
PersonLiz Stefanics“Cosponsor of Senate Bill 16”Map →
OrganizationUnited States department of health and human services“Deems health facilities to qualify for federal funds as federally qualified heal”Map →
PersonAntoinette Sedillo Lopez“Introduced Senate Bill 16”Map →
PersonBobby Gonzales“Cosponsor of Senate Bill 16”Map →
PersonLeo Jaramillo“Cosponsor of Senate Bill 16”Map →
PersonMartin Hickey“Cosponsor of Senate Bill 16”Map →
PersonPete Campos“Sponsor of Senate Bill 16”Map →
Organizationhealth care authority“Licenses health care facilities, hospitals, and long-term care facilities”Map →
PersonBill Soules“Cosponsor of Senate Bill 16”Map →
locationNew Mexico“State jurisdiction where the act applies”Map →
Organizationdepartment of health“Operates state-owned special hospitals, which are excluded from the hospital def”Map →

Sources

Open source document

www.nmlegis.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance20
    Lowered because this bill did not pass (its text scored 75)
  • Controversy65
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment10
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz40
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record