NMCLP NEWS RELEASE

On February 19, 2026, plaintiffs in Yazzie/Martinez v. State of New Mexico filed formal Objections to the State’s Education Remedial Action Plan and a Joint Motion for Further Relief, asking the First Judicial District Court to reject the State’s November 2025 Comprehensive Remedial Action Plan and order a lawful rewrite. The State submitted its plan in response to the Court’s May 2025 order directing it to develop a concrete roadmap for meeting New Mexico’s constitutional obligation to provide all students with a sufficient and uniform education.

Plaintiffs argue the State’s submission is not a true remedial plan, but a collection of existing programs and broad aspirations that fails to explain what changes will be made, how much they will cost, when they will happen, or who will be responsible if students continue to be left behind. Without those elements, they argue, the plan cannot correct the constitutional violations the Court identified.

In 2018, the Court ruled that New Mexico was denying Native students, English learners, students with disabilities, and students from low-income families their constitutional right to a sufficient education. The Court retained jurisdiction to ensure those violations were corrected.

Seven years later, plaintiffs say the State still has not produced a comprehensive, enforceable roadmap capable of remedying those violations.

Although overall education funding has increased in recent years, plaintiffs argue the State has not demonstrated how those dollars are tied to fixing the specific problems identified by the Court, producing measurable improvements for students at the center of the case, or closing documented gaps in services and opportunity.

According to the motion, the State’s plan fails to meet the Court’s May 2025 Order because it does not include:

• Measurable short- and long-term benchmarks showing how students’ outcomes will improve
• A full analysis of how much it will actually cost to fix the problems the Court identified
• Funding commitments aligned with documented student needs
• Clear implementation timelines and accountability structures

The motion also argues the Plan fails to meaningfully operationalize existing legal obligations under state and federal education laws, instead compiling programs without demonstrating how they will remedy the violations identified by the Court.

Plaintiffs ground their filing in years of documented community input, expert analysis, and testimony from families, educators, tribal leaders, bilingual education experts, and disability advocates. That record, they argue, consistently points to the same conclusion: meaningful compliance requires sustained structural investment and system redesign — not temporary or fragmented initiatives.

Students across New Mexico continue to experience systemic gaps that mirror the Court’s 2018 findings, including:

• Insufficient protection and expansion of bilingual, Native, and heritage language instruction, with no dedicated statewide funding streams
• Underfunded and inconsistently implemented bilingual and multicultural education systems, leaving culturally relevant curriculum dependent on local capacity rather than guaranteed standards
• Fragmented special education systems that fail to coherently address the needs of students with disabilities across the education continuum
• Inadequate behavioral health and student support systems, contributing to disproportionate discipline, informal removals, restraint and seclusion practices, and exclusionary environments
• Funding formulas that are not transparently aligned with at-risk student needs or documented adequacy gaps
• Persistent shortages of certified bilingual, special education, Native teachers, and related service providers
• Tribal engagement processes that stop at consultation rather than reflecting true government-to-government partnership and shared authority

While the State’s plan references many of these priorities — including bilingual education, culturally relevant curriculum, special education supports, and tribal consultation — plaintiffs argue it does not embed them into binding funding structures, clearly assigned agency responsibility, defined cross-agency partnerships, or measurable implementation requirements capable of delivering full compliance.

What Plaintiffs Are Asking the Court to Order

The motion asks the Court to require:

• A rewritten remedial plan developed in collaboration with plaintiffs and subject-matter experts
• Specific corrective actions tied directly to each constitutional violation identified in 2018
• Measurable benchmarks aligned with student outcomes for the four student groups at the heart of the case
• A comprehensive cost analysis and funding plan  so lawmakers know what it will take to meet students’ needs
• Clear timelines and public accountability mechanisms

Full filings, including the Motion for Further Relief and supporting exhibits, are available at: https://www.nmpovertylaw.org/nmclp_resources/%e2%9c%8a-yazzie-martinez-plaintiffs-objections-and-motion-for-further-relief/

Community Voices

Wilhelmina Yazzie (Diné), Lead Plaintiff:

“Every parent wants their child in a school that honors who they are and the brilliance they carry. The Court confirmed that New Mexico was denying our families that foundational, constitutional right. Seven years later, the State has submitted a document that still fails to provide real protections or guarantees. Our children continue to bear the consequences.”

Melissa Candelaria, Education Director, New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty:

“For years, families across New Mexico have done the work the State was ordered to do. They have documented what students need, submitted written reports, testified publicly, and participated in structured review processes. That evidence is organized, consistent, and part of the record. The Court affirmed that these needs are constitutional obligations, yet the State’s submission does not translate them into enforceable funding, concrete actions, or timelines. Compliance requires a transformation of the system, not just program descriptions.”

Travis McKenzie, teacher and advocate:

“Every day, we see what works for students when their culture, language, and learning needs are fully supported. We are discovering and creating solutions but are having to navigate challenges and barriers like funding issues and lack of support for our innovative practices. We want to ensure that these practices are sustained, strengthened, and implemented consistently across schools. Our students deserve long-term commitment so culturally responsive teaching and curriculum become the norm, not just struggling to survive and thrive.”

Regis Pecos, Co-Chair, Tribal Education Alliance:

“Our elders remind us that when language is lost, culture is lost, and when culture is lost, we  as a People will perish. We will be reduced to a hollow existence. Education must be the place where our languages and identities are strengthened for cultural survival. Tribal sovereignty and Indigenous self-determination and self-governance must be reflected in real authority and not symbolic consultation. What our children inherit depends on what we choose to protect today. The Keres word “Skewa” means duality, we must give equal value to our languages and all that defines who we are while we develop the skills and tools through a balanced education necessary to protect all that we cherish. That will define success.”

Marsha Leno, Yazzie/Martinez plaintiff:

“Our children deserve more than vague promises and reports. After years of sharing our stories and ideas, the State’s plan still leaves our kids without the focused support they need to truly thrive. We know what works — we’ve shown them what must be done. Now the plan needs to put that into real, binding commitments that make a difference in our children’s classrooms and in their lives.”

Loretta Trujillo, Executive Director, Transform Education NM

“Our students are not the problem. The system is. For years, families and communities have been clear about what is needed. Equity does not mean asking students to overcome barriers. It means redesigning the system so those barriers do not exist in the first place. That requires sustained investment and structural change, not temporary fixes.”

George Luján, Executive Director, SouthWest Organizing Project

“Community input is not just a checkbox- it’s the basis of effective education for every child in the state. We don’t just want to be consulted, we need real authority and ownership of decisions that affect our schools and are paid for by our taxes. Accountability means plans and promises are backed by power, resources, and consequences. Our children need to see their communities and cultures reflected in their education, and we won’t accept anything less.”

The New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty is dedicated to advancing economic and social justice through education, advocacy, and litigation. We work with low-income New Mexicans to improve living conditions, increase opportunities, and protect the rights of people living in poverty.