Santa Fe, NM — On May 14, The New York Times reported that Federal Magistrate Judge Gregory B. Wormuth dismissed charges brought by the Trump administration against 100 migrants, citing a “cut-and-paste approach to factual allegations” and a lack of probable cause. The ruling raises the possibility that identical charges against hundreds of other migrants could soon be thrown out.
Despite the dismissals, The Times notes, many migrants still face misdemeanor charges for illegal entry and remain subject to likely deportation.
The Trump administration’s enforcement efforts stem from the creation of a new 180-mile military zone, the New Mexico National Defense Area, established in April 2025. The zone stretches the length of the New Mexico-Mexico border and has been declared an extension of Fort Huachuca, a military base in eastern Arizona.
However, according to The Times, Judge Wormuth ruled that the federal government failed to prove the migrants knowingly entered a restricted military zone. “The United States provides no facts from which one could reasonably conclude that the Defendant knew he was entering,” Wormuth wrote.
The ruling has added to the “confusion and legal turmoil” gripping the region since the military zone was established, according to The Times. Reactions across New Mexico have varied sharply.
“It’s just a bunch of desert,” said Carlos Ibarra, a defense lawyer representing one of the migrants. “They’re just coming over the same as usual, and all of a sudden, it’s military charges. Nobody knows what’s going on.”
Defense attorneys argued that many migrants were arrested without seeing or understanding warning signs—some of which were installed after arrests or were unreadable in the dark. Still, they say they remain open to legitimate evidence.
“If the government has the evidence to support the charges, they’re welcome to refile,” said Amanda Skinner, an assistant federal defender who filed a brief last week challenging the prosecutions. “We’ve been convinced there was no probable cause.”
Meanwhile, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth previously praised the arrests of 400 migrants—98 of whom have now had their cases dismissed—arguing in a May 9 social media post that they should be “prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”
The Times notes that federal prosecutors may appeal the dismissals or refile charges, provided they present new evidence showing that migrants knowingly trespassed. The government may also try to argue that they violated the Roosevelt Reservation—a 60-foot-wide federal strip along the border—regardless of awareness of the military zone.
Yet the ruling raises larger questions about the Trump administration’s expansion of military and legal authority, particularly in Democratic-leaning New Mexico.
Some local conservatives have welcomed the military zone. Outside the border town of Columbus, The Times spoke to James Johnson, a farmer whose family has worked the land for a century. Johnson said migrants had damaged fences and water pipes. “Now the area feels more secure,” he said. “I haven’t seen much of a military presence, but the Border Patrol is actually doing what they’re supposed to be doing—patrolling the border.”
Still, The Times reports that the active-duty troops have mainly provided surveillance support and have not made any arrests. Maj. Geoffrey A. Carmichael, spokesperson for the Joint Task Force Southern Border, clarified that the military’s role ends where Border Patrol’s law enforcement authority begins. “Adjudication is the responsibility of the Department of Justice, not the Department of Defense,” he said in response to questions about the dismissed cases.
Both the U.S. Attorney’s Office in New Mexico and the Justice Department have declined to comment on the dismissals.
State Senator Anthony Thornton, a Republican from outside Albuquerque, called Trump’s military strategy a “brilliant solution” to combat drug trafficking and human smuggling. But many New Mexicans remain deeply uneasy about the presence of “thousands of active-duty troops” and armored vehicles so close to their communities.
“What is the current public access status of the lands?” asked U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-NM) in a letter to Secretary Hegseth. “Are these areas now closed to public entry, or are they still accessible to U.S. citizens?”
Luna County Commissioner Ray Trejo, a Democrat, shared his concerns. “Imagine me hunting in the mountains, and some Army guys see me in camouflage with a gun,” he said. “The administration didn’t think this through.”
The Times noted that a wide range of individuals could be affected by the military zone, including humanitarian volunteers searching for the remains of deceased migrants, hikers on the Continental Divide Trail, and hunters using public lands.
Major Carmichael confirmed that even U.S. citizens are now restricted from accessing the area. “Humanitarian aid groups cannot operate without permission,” he said.
“It’s beginning to feel like an occupation,” said Sarah Silva, a Democratic state representative from Las Cruces. “It’s putting people on edge.”
Trump’s plan has resulted in the military occupying over 170 square miles of public land—far more than many residents anticipated and well beyond the 60-foot Roosevelt Reservation. The zone extends three miles into the U.S. interior.
Signs reading “Restricted Area” have been posted every few hundred feet along the border, in both English and Spanish. They warn travelers of potential searches, prohibit photography, and restrict note-taking. Yet many of the signs face south, making them visible only to migrants arriving from Mexico—not to Americans coming from the north. Additionally, popular navigation apps like OnX still list the area under Bureau of Land Management jurisdiction, not under the Department of Defense.
Although border crossings have dropped sharply, The Times reports that new problems have emerged: local courts are overwhelmed, jail beds are running out, and nearly every person apprehended is being criminally charged rather than simply turned back.
The establishment of a second 50-mile military base extending from Fort Bliss in El Paso has only added to the uncertainty. Local officials remain unsure of where military authority ends in the vast, unmarked expanses of the Southwest—setting what some see as a dangerous precedent in federal law enforcement.
