By Victor Li

SANTA FE, N.M. — Citing the formidable legal shield of prosecutorial immunity, a federal judge in New Mexico has dismissed the bulk of actor Alec Baldwin’s retaliatory civil lawsuit against the prosecutors who previously sought to hold him criminally responsible for the fatal 2021 shooting on the movie set of Rust.

U.S. District Judge Kea Riggs of the District of New Mexico ruled that state prosecutors Mary Carmack-Altwies and Andrea Reeb were entitled to absolute immunity regarding most of the individual claims brought forward by Baldwin. The court’s decision arrives just weeks after Judge Riggs dismissed similar claims targeting special prosecutor Kari Morrissey, applying the identical legal standard that protects prosecutors from civil liability while performing their core judicial duties.

Even as the federal court narrowed the scope of the civil action significantly, Judge Riggs made it clear that the allegations contained within Baldwin’s complaint were far from trivial. In her written opinion, she expressed notable concern regarding the alleged professional misconduct of the state attorneys.

“Even though the court is concerned by the allegations of misconduct by defendants Carmack-Altwies and Reeb, it recognizes that, as prosecutors, they are entitled to invoke the protection of absolute prosecutorial immunity,” Judge Riggs wrote in her decision.

The long-unfolding legal saga has its roots in a tragic accident on October 21, 2021, at the Bonanza Creek Ranch near Santa Fe, New Mexico, where the Western film Rust was actively filming. During a rehearsal on the movie set, a prop gun held by Baldwin discharged, firing a live round that struck and fatally wounded cinematographer Halyna Hutchins while injuring director Joel Souza. The incident sent shockwaves through the global entertainment industry, sparking intense scrutiny regarding firearms safety protocols on independent film sets and leading to a labyrinth of criminal investigations and civil litigations.

Following initial investigations, Baldwin was formally charged with involuntary manslaughter in 2023. However, the high-profile criminal case imploded during trial in July 2024. The presiding judge ultimately dismissed the criminal indictment with prejudice after discovering that law enforcement and the prosecution had failed to properly disclose critical evidence to the defense, committing what the court termed egregious discovery violations regarding a batch of ammunition brought to the sheriff’s office.

Buoyed by the dismissal of his criminal charges, Baldwin’s legal team struck back in early 2025, filing a civil lawsuit that accused the state’s legal actors of malicious prosecution, defamation, and severe civil rights violations. The complaint argued that the prosecutors had weaponized the judicial system against the actor, pursuing a politically charged case despite evidentiary shortcomings and ethical missteps.

Yet, as Courthouse News Service detailed in its coverage of the federal proceedings, Judge Riggs determined that the doctrine of absolute prosecutorial immunity heavily insulated the defendants from liability for the majority of the claims. The legal doctrine is designed to ensure that prosecutors can perform their duties without the constant threat of personal civil lawsuits from disgruntled defendants.

Despite applying the immunity shield broadly, Judge Riggs drew firm lines regarding certain actions that fell outside the scope of traditional prosecutorial duties. Specifically, the judge ruled that Carmack-Altwies was not protected by absolute immunity concerning her alleged role in investigating and destroying the prop gun involved in the shooting. Riggs noted that such actions were “too far removed from the judicial process” to warrant absolute protection. Additionally, claims tied to Carmack-Altwies’ alleged media statements and her direct involvement in the preliminary law enforcement investigation were allowed to proceed, largely because the prosecutor had not formally sought their dismissal in that portion of the litigation.

The federal judge also addressed the dual role played by Andrea Reeb, finding that Reeb had violated constitutional separation of powers principles by simultaneously serving as a New Mexico state legislator and acting as a special prosecutor on the high-profile case. Despite identifying this constitutional friction, Riggs concluded that Reeb nevertheless retained the legal authority to prosecute the matter. Furthermore, the judge declined to dismiss a handful of what she characterized as “vague and undated allegations” leveled against Reeb, ruling that it was premature at this early stage of the proceedings to determine whether immunity applied to those specific points.

Legal representatives for the targeted prosecutors expressed satisfaction with the federal court’s outcome. Luis Robles, attorney for the defense team, stated that his clients were both “relieved” and “heartened” by Judge Riggs’ comprehensive ruling as it significantly trimmed the multi-pronged lawsuit.

Meanwhile, representatives and legal counsel for Alec Baldwin did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Courthouse News Service regarding the partial dismissal of the civil complaint.

The ruling marks yet another complex chapter in the ongoing legal fallout from the Rust production, even as separate civil negligence lawsuits and appeals continue to navigate the court system.