What does this week’s reform mean for judicial review in Mexico?

President Claudia Sheinbaum on Thursday signed into law a constitutional reform that prevents legal challenges to constitutional amendments, such as Mexico’s recently passed judicial reform.

The reform was promulgated by a decree published in the Official Gazette of the Federation (DOF) a day later the lower house of Congress approved the so-called “constitutional supremacy” law..

A majority of Mexico’s 32 state legislatures promptly ratified the reform, allowing Sheinbaum to sign it into law in due course.

The reform amends two articles of the Mexican Constitution.

Article 105 now states that constitutional challenges or “actions of unconstitutionality” seeking to challenge “additions or reforms to this Constitution” are “inadmissible”.

Article 107 now provides that lawsuits “against additions or reforms” to the Constitution “shall not continue.”

The decree published in the DOF also states that “the issues in the process must be resolved in accordance with the provisions contained in this decree”.

The reform would appear to prevent Mexico’s Supreme Court (SCJN) from issuing a binding ruling on a proposal to overturn part of the judicial reform that was approved by Congress in September and signed into law by former president Andrés Manuel López Obrador two weeks before leaving office.

indeed Morena took the reform proposal to Congress precisely to prevent the Supreme Court and other courts from ruling against constitutional reforms.

Even though the reform has been approved and promulgated, heated debate continues over the CSJN’s right to issue a binding ruling on judicial reform and other constitutional reforms.

At the proposal of Judge Juan Luis González Alcántara Carrancá — one of eight CSJN judges who submitted letters of resignation to the Senate this week — only Supreme Court justices would be elected and all other justices would continue to be appointed.

The government plans to hold elections in 2025 and 2027 in which Mexican citizens would directly elect thousands of local, state and federal judges. National Action Party filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court against the judicial reform that allows those elections to take place.

Despite the DOF decree stating that the “constitutional supremacy” reform applies to “issues under trial,” Justice González said the justices can vote on his proposal next Tuesday as scheduled.

For her part, President Claudia Sheinbaum said this week that the Supreme Court does not have the authority to legislate or overturn a constitutional reform that “has followed all the (legislative) processes that the constitution establishes.”

No judge can abrogate a constitutional reform, says the Morena leader

Speaking Thursday afternoon, Morena’s leader in the lower house of Congress, Rep. Ricardo Monreal, said no judge, magistrate or Supreme Court justice can rule against a reform that was approved by Congress and later ratified by state legislatures. of the state and promulgated by the president.

“It is not valid. They have no jurisdiction, no authority… to do that. … What we did (with the ‘constitutional supremacy’) reform was to reaffirm what the Constitution already says (regarding) the indisputable character, the inadmissibility of appeals and actions against reforms and additions to the Constitution,” said Monreal, who has a Ph.D. in constitutional law.

The leader of the Morena party claimed that the “constitutional supremacy” reform is the “deepest” reform “in the 200 years of the country’s life”.

He also said that the legal principle of non-retroactivity “is not observable in the case of constitutional reforms.

Monreal’s view is that because the “constitutional supremacy” reform applies retroactively, the Supreme Court is prevented from making a binding ruling on judicial reform, given that the issue is already “under trial”.

News site Animal Político reported that under the “constitutional supremacy” reform, previous rulings against judicial reform and “the project that Judge Juan Luis González Alcántara proposes to declare unconstitutional the popular election of judges and magistrates should to be dismissed, i.e. suspended.”

On this point, González and others disagree.

González: “We will have a constitutional crisis” if the government does not comply with the CSJN ruling

During an interview with Grupo Fórmula on Friday, González was asked what would happen if the Supreme Court ruled against part of the judicial reform and the government refused to comply.

“We will have a constitutional crisis and all Mexicans will have to absorb and suffer the consequences,” the justice said.

Eight of the 11 justices would have to vote in favor of González’s proposal for the CSJN to rule against the judicial reform provision that would allow the direct election of nearly all Mexican judges. The eight judges who resigned this week to protest the government’s judicial review remain on the court for now and appear likely to vote in favor of the proposal.

González said failure to comply with a Supreme Court ruling against judicial reform would relegate the rule of law in Mexico to the “history books.”

He characterized his proposal to allow the election of Supreme Court justices only as a political-legal solution to the uncertainty and division created by judicial reform.

“I think the president will have to reflect (on what to do), she has these days to do it, these days that are so important for the people of Mexico,” González said, referring to the period before the 11 judges. to consider and rule on his proposal on Tuesday.

The justice said Sheinbaum “will have to reflect on the harm” failure to comply with a CSJN ruling “would cause to the institutions” and “credibility” of Mexico as a country that respects the rule of law.

In a separate interview on Thursday, González said the government’s failure to comply with a CSJN ruling would impact foreign investment in Mexico and “our relations with trading partners with whom we have concluded a number of international treaties and bilateral agreements. .”

“All people’s lives would be affected,” he added.

González is not alone in saying that Mexico could be heading for a constitutional crisis.

Others who have made the same or similar remarks include former Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo. IN A opinion piece published in The Washington Post on Friday, he wrote that Sheinbaum is “advocating that the government ignore court rulings” and is “fueling” a constitutional crisis.

Analyst: González is trying to throw the government a “lifeline”.

During a group discussion on a Mexican television program, analyst and writer Viri Ríos said González was “trying to throw a lifeline to the governing coalition,” which includes Morena, the Labor Party and the Green Party.

“He is proposing that the most difficult part (of judicial reform) to implement, which would be the mass election of judges, … should not be implemented,” she said.

SCJN sent a life preserver to Morena with the Alcántara project.

But it’s a poisoned life preserver.

Here comment what: pic.twitter.com/9csDDWl7kS

— Viri Ríos (@Viri_Rios) October 31, 2024

Ríos said there is an argument in favor of the government taking that “lifeline” because it would eliminate the problems of “instability in the markets” and “constant battles” with Mexico’s judicial system.

However, she argued that the government should not take the lifeline that González is trying to offer because it is a “poisoned lifeline.”

To accept the lifeline, Ríos said, the government would have to agree to allow the Supreme Court to “nullify constitutional reforms” — which various officials, including Sheinbaum, say it does not have the power to do.

“That’s what it’s about. I think it’s very dangerous because it basically puts democracy in the hands of 11 people and it goes from being a democratic electoral system to being a system that looks a lot more like a judicial aristocracy,” she said.

With reports from Reform, Radio Formula, La Jornada, Millennium, El Financiero and Political Animal