BREAKING: Otero County Judge Orders Amy Smith Barela to Immediately Vacate Position as New Mexico Republican Party Chairwoman

ALAMOGORDO, N.M. — May 27, 2026 — In a major development in the ongoing internal dispute within the Republican Party of New Mexico, Otero County District Court Judge Cindy M. Mercer today granted a preliminary injunction ordering State Republican Party Chairwoman Amy Smith Barela to immediately vacate her position as chairwoman.

The ruling, issued this morning in Case No. D-1215-CV-2026-00406 (Twelfth Judicial District Court, Otero County), also enjoins Barela, the Republican Party of New Mexico, Jim Townsend, and Kimberly Skaggs from publicly endorsing or supporting one Republican candidate over another in any contested 2026 Republican primary — including through the party’s official social media accounts, email lists, mailings, or events.

The order stems from a verified emergency motion filed by plaintiffs Jonathan Emery, Aburey Blair Dunn, Duke Rodriguez, and two anonymous State Central Committee (SCC) members. They alleged that Barela and other party officials violated the Republican Party of New Mexico’s Uniform State Rules on conflicts of interest.

Specifically, the court enforced two bylaws:

• Rule 1-4-3: “Officers shall not publicly endorse one Republican candidate over another Republican candidate in a primary.”
• Rule 1-4-4: “In the event the state chairman or any other state officer files as a candidate for public office and there is another Republican who has filed for the same office, the state officer shall immediately vacate the party office.”

Judge Mercer ruled that both provisions are unambiguous and intended to prevent party officers from using their positions to favor themselves or preferred candidates in primaries. Barela, who serves as an Otero County Commissioner, is seeking re-election to District 2 in a contested Republican primary against plaintiff Jonathan Emery, a longtime Otero County Sheriff’s Office deputy and local candidate. The June 2, 2026 primary is now just days away.

In a detailed 8-page order, the court found that defendants received proper notice of the May 21 hearing and that the matter is properly before the court. Judge Mercer rejected arguments that judicial involvement in enforcing party bylaws violates constitutional rights or constitutes a nonjusticiable political question, noting that the bylaws form an enforceable contract among party members.

The court concluded that plaintiffs demonstrated:

1. Irreparable injury (Barela’s continued use of the chair position and party resources while campaigning creates unremediable disadvantages);
2. The balance of harms favors plaintiffs;
3. The injunction serves the public interest (enforcing valid, filed party rules); and
4. Plaintiffs are likely to prevail on the merits.

A link to the ruling Order-Granting-Preliminary-Injunction.pdf - Google Drive

“By voluntarily joining the party, Defendants agreed to be bound by its bylaws,” the order states. “Requiring Defendants to adhere to those bylaws cannot be considered an injury to them.”

The preliminary injunction is not a final ruling on the merits but remains in effect pending further proceedings. It follows an earlier hearing in which the court heard evidence and argument.

This Otero County case is one of two lawsuits filed April 30 seeking to remove Barela from the chair position; a parallel case was filed in Bernalillo County. The dispute has highlighted divisions within New Mexico Republicans ahead of the June primary.

Challenger to Amy Barela, Johnathan Emery issues the following statement:

“I have been asked by numerous sources for a statement on yesterday's court decision. Why have I been quiet, and why haven't I talked about this lawsuit at all? Well, I'm not gloating because this lawsuit is not just about my campaign or the others involved. It should have never had to be filed in the first place. Yesterday was a win, not for me, not for just those who filed, but for the Republican Party and for all the people of the State of New Mexico. We took a stand because no one is above the rules of law, and someone had to. I took a stand because, as I stated in an earlier post, even if I had to fight the party I was a member of, I would. If I break the rules or violate the law, I would be disciplined, up to and including termination, or worse, arrested and/or incarcerated. I don't know what effect, if any, this lawsuit will have on June 2nd, since the damage is already done. My campaign was labeled 'David vs. Goliath' in the early days of its announcement. Well, some of those words in the article continued to play out that scenario. The battle is not over; I may be David in that story, but Otero County is the slingshot, and District 2 is the rock!”

New Mexico Republican Party Official Response

Alamogordo Town News and New Mexico Conservative News will continue to follow this developing story, and is seeking a response from the various parties and including any responses from the Republican Party of New Mexico, potential appeals, and impacts on the upcoming primary election. 

Court documents are publicly available under Case No. D-1215-CV-2026-00406.

Listen to an explainer podcast at

https://newmexicoconservativenews.com/2026/05/27/court-removal-of-nm-gop-chair-amy-barelas-controversy-explained-podcast-discussion/

Stay tuned to 2nd Life Media, Alamogordo Town News, and KALH Radio for the latest updates.

Listen to an explainer podcast https://newmexicoconservativenews.com/2026/05/27/court-removal-of-nm-gop-chair-amy-barelas-controversy-explained-podcast-discussion/

More News from Alamogordo

• IPRA Task Force Public Meetings: Urgent Call for Otero County Residents to Defend Transparency and Public Access Rights Your voice is required to keep politicians from closing freedom of information act inquiries - IPRA is a must.
• COMPANION ARTICLE: NM Supreme Court Rules Today That Government Cannot Hide Public Records Behind Its Own Policies — And It Lands Directly on Alamogordo's June 23 Court Date Part 2 in our series of recent transparency wins from the NM Supreme Court