Trump Renews Push to Rename New Mexico ‘New America’

President Donald Trump is renewing his proposal to rename New Mexico as “New America,” arguing that the change would strengthen the state’s identity, increase its prestige, and potentially boost property values and residents’ incomes. The president’s latest remarks have revived a debate over whether the state should abandon a name that has existed for centuries.

Trump made the renewed appeal Monday on Truth Social, urging state officials to embrace a new identity that he believes would better reflect the United States. However, the proposal faces significant legal obstacles because changing New Mexico’s official name would require action at the state level, including approval from voters.

Should Trump Rename New Mexico to 'New America'?

Yes 👍 No 👎

“New Mexico should immediately change its name to New America,” Trump wrote. “We are not Mexico, we are the United States of America!”

The president argued that adopting the new name would bring “great value and prestige” to New Mexico, suggesting that the benefits could extend beyond symbolism to the state’s economy and real estate market.

Trump also raised concerns about the state’s elections, suggesting that a name change could improve election integrity. He claimed that “the fraudulent elections, for which New Mexico is known, would be honest again.”

The president did not provide evidence supporting his allegations of widespread election fraud in New Mexico.

The proposal is not entirely new. Trump initially promoted the idea in September, sharing social media messages and edited images portraying the state under the proposed name.

🔥 See Melania's STUNNING New Look — Don’t Miss It ➔

He returned to the subject earlier this month while endorsing Republican congressional candidate Greg Cunningham, referring to New Mexico as “New America — formerly known as New Mexico.”

“I do like the change, by the way, to New America,” Trump said during the endorsement video. “What a beautiful change that would be. Up to you. I’m not gonna push it.”

Despite Trump’s enthusiasm, New Mexico’s Democratic leadership has opposed the proposal, while some Republicans have questioned whether such a sweeping change could realistically happen.

The state constitution explicitly identifies New Mexico by its current name, meaning any official replacement would require a constitutional amendment and voter approval under state law.

Although Trump could direct federal agencies to adopt different terminology, that would not legally rename the state or require local governments, businesses, and residents to follow his preferred designation.

Members of New Mexico’s congressional delegation have also urged technology companies, including Google and Apple, to preserve the state’s existing name on their mapping platforms.

The controversy carries historical significance. New Mexico’s name dates to the Spanish colonial period, and the region has deep cultural connections to Indigenous communities and generations of Hispanic residents.

Trump’s latest proposal follows several other geographical renaming initiatives pursued during his presidency, including his January 2025 executive order directing federal agencies to use “Gulf of America” instead of “Gulf of Mexico.”

The president also directed federal agencies in August 2026 to adopt “Lake America” as the designation for Lake Ontario, a body of water shared by the United States and Canada. The decision drew criticism from Canadians who objected to the unilateral change.

Another prominent example came when Trump restored the federal designation Mount McKinley for Alaska’s highest mountain, reversing the Obama administration’s decision to recognize its Indigenous name, Denali. The surrounding Denali National Park and Preserve retained its name.

The administration has defended these initiatives as efforts to recognize American history and strengthen national identity. Critics argue that such changes can disregard cultural heritage and longstanding geographic traditions. For New Mexico, however, the final decision would rest with the state’s own constitutional process rather than the president alone.