New Mexico Supreme Court bans judge after alleged TdA member arrested at home

Exhibit filed March 13, 2025, in the case U.S. v. Cristhian Ortega-Lopez, described as “Cristhian with the Cano family in their home.”  (U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico)

| Published April 24, 2025

The New Mexico Supreme Court has permanently barred former Judge Joel Cano from holding any judicial office in the state following the arrest of an alleged Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang member at his residence.​

In February 2025, Homeland Security Investigations apprehended Cristhian Ortega-Lopez, a Venezuelan national and suspected member of the violent TdA gang, at a home owned by Cano’s wife in Las Cruces. Ortega-Lopez, who had entered the U.S. illegally, was found living with other undocumented individuals and in possession of firearms. Court documents revealed that he had close ties to the Cano family, including attending family dinners and handling firearms owned by Cano’s daughter.​

Cano resigned from his position in March 2025, and the Supreme Court’s decision ensures he cannot serve in any judicial capacity in New Mexico, including officiating weddings. This case underscores the judiciary’s commitment to maintaining ethical standards and the rule of law.

---

Here are the pros and cons of the New Mexico Supreme Court’s decision to permanently bar former Judge Joel Cano after a suspected gang member was arrested at his home:

✅ Pros

1. Upholds Judicial Integrity

• Demonstrates the court’s commitment to maintaining high ethical standards and public trust in the judiciary.

• Sends a clear message that personal associations with criminal elements—intentional or not—won’t be tolerated.

2. Public Safety Emphasis

• Shows seriousness in responding to organized crime, especially involving dangerous gangs like Tren de Aragua.

• Reinforces the idea that no one is above the law, even members of the judiciary.

3. Precedent for Accountability

• Sets a strong precedent that could deter other judges or public officials from engaging in questionable personal ties or conduct.

❌ Cons

1. Due Process Concerns

• Critics might argue the punishment was too severe, especially if Cano wasn’t directly involved in criminal activity.

• Raises questions about whether enough evidence tied him personally to the gang member’s actions.

2. Impact on Family Privacy

• The case blurs lines between a public official’s private life and professional responsibilities, which can be controversial.

3. Potential Legal Challenges

• The decision might open the door for appeals or legal disputes, especially if Cano argues that his rights were violated or that he wasn’t given a fair chance to respond.

---

🔚 Conclusion

The New Mexico Supreme Court’s decision to permanently bar Judge Joel Cano underscores the seriousness with which the judiciary treats ethical conduct and public trust. While the move reinforces a strong stance against any ties to criminal elements—especially in the context of violent gangs like Tren de Aragua—it also raises complex questions about due process, personal boundaries, and the consequences of associations.

Ultimately, the ruling serves as a bold reminder that those in positions of public authority are held to the highest standards, both in and out of the courtroom.

---

SOURCES: FOX NEWS – New Mexico Supreme Court bans judge after alleged TdA member arrested at home

THE NATIONAL DEK – NM judge slapped with lifetime ban from state judicial work for harboring TdA member

REDSTATE – Dem Judge Banned by State Supreme Court After Alleged Tren De Aragua Illegal Arrested at His Residence

---