9 May 2025; start date not confirmedPractice noteUnited States District Court, District of New Mexico (Chief Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales)Last checked 31 October 2026
Jurisdiction
New Mexico: AI rules for lawyers
New Mexico, United States · Switch state
- United States federal courts
- Alabama
- Alaska
- Arizona
- Arkansas
- California
- Colorado
- Connecticut
- Delaware
- District of Columbia
- Florida
- Georgia
- Hawaii
- Idaho
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Kansas
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Maine
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Mississippi
- Missouri
- Montana
- Nebraska
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New York
- North Carolina
- North Dakota
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
- West Virginia
- Wisconsin
- Wyoming
What this means for lawyers
The State Bar's Formal Opinion 2024-004 says a New Mexico lawyer may use generative AI but must do so responsibly; it is advisory only, not binding.
Bill only actual time spent; pass on tool costs only if the client is told in writing beforehand. Before using generative AI, lawyers with managerial authority must put AI policies in place and train lawyers and staff.
Check each court's and each federal judge's rules. In the federal District of New Mexico, one judge's standing order requires disclosure and certification in filings; the court's May 2025 bulletin prohibits filings with non-existent citations.
As at .
Telling the court and the client
- Tell the courtVaries by court
Client disclosure/consent: depends. The Bar opinion says discussion with the client may be needed under Rule 16-104 if AI plays a significant role in final products, the client asks, or confidential data must be disclosed; informed consent for inputting confidential data in appropriate cases.
- Tell the clientVaries
Same basis and sources as above.
What changed in New Mexico in the last 12 months
No new or changed AI rules recorded for New Mexico in the last 12 months.
AI instruments
Courts and tribunals
Professional guidanceUnited States District Court, District of New Mexico (District Judge Margaret I. Strickland)Date not statedLast checked 31 October 2026
State bar and regulators
24 September 2024; start date not confirmedProfessional guidanceState Bar of New Mexico, Ethics Advisory CommitteeLast checked 31 October 2026
Sources
- United States District Court, District of New Mexico (Chief Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales): Bulletin: Use of Artificial Intelligence in the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico · last checked
- United States District Court, District of New Mexico (District Judge Margaret I. Strickland): Standing Order Establishing Disclosure and Certification Requirements for Generative Artificial Intelligence · last checked
- State Bar of New Mexico, Ethics Advisory Committee: Formal Ethics Advisory Opinion 2024-004: Using Generative Artificial Intelligence in the Practice of Law · last checked
- NM Supreme Court · last checked
- NM Legislature · last checked
Court AI rule changes + new tools, monthly
One email a month when a court changes its AI practice note or a tool is added to the catalogue. Your address is kept for that note. See Privacy.
Before the work starts
- Define the matter
Confirm the client’s instructions, jurisdiction, intended output and the information available before dividing the work.
- Confirm the source material
Check the work against the original records and identify omissions, contradictions and remaining information.
- Record review and approval
Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.
- Jurisdiction
Apply this guidance to the actual matter and jurisdiction. Confirm current requirements before relying on an example.
Limits on AI assistance
- Confirm firm, client and applicable court or professional restrictions before using any AI feature.