Mexico City /
The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) admitted a pending query that challenges the judicial reformso this will be turned over for study to another minister, who will determine if the highest court has the power to review it and stop it with the arguments that it violates the independence and division of powers.
For different reasons, eight ministers assured that the Court does have the power to review this type of consultation.
However, the decision to admit him caused Minister Lenia Batres to accuse an attempted “coup d’état.”
“The Court would be carrying out an authentic, and I say this in all its letters, coup d’état, by attempting to subject to constitutional control the work of the reforming power that has participated in the legislative process.”
The minister Yasmín Esquivel Mossa He supported Batres and questioned the Court’s decision.
“Is this a preamble to a legal constitutional coup d’état? “Does the Court want to ignore the reforming power of the Constitution by sending the message that it can overturn the ruling?” he expressed.
Your pair Juan Luis González Alcántara Carrancá He referred directly to Batres and pointed out that 10 years ago when Ricardo Monreal, Ernestina Godoy and Adam Augusto Lopez They asked for the intervention of the Court to review a constitutional reform; no one accused them of being “coup plotters.”
“I would like to remember that in indirect protection 70/2014, signed by great jurists of our country whom I respect very much – such as Ernestina Godoy, Adán Augusto López and Ricardo Monreal –, they asked to review the process of reforming the Constitution 10 years ago; No one at that time accused them of being coup plotters,” he emphasized.
Meanwhile, the minister Margarita Ríos-Farjat He pointed out that, regardless of what is resolved, this historical moment offers the possibility for Mexican constitutional law to be enriched with broader debates.
“If these consultations or debates had not been presented before, it is because a reform like the one last month had not been carried out. The theory of constitutional law cannot deny itself these analyzes in favor of and on behalf of the people,” he added.
The minister Loretta Ortizwho also opposed admitting him, pointed out that the Court will not grant the judges’ request.
“Decision is irreversible”
The president Claudia Sheinbaum assured that any appeal presented to the Court or international bodies against the reform to the Judiciary It has no support.
In the morning he maintained that this reform is already in the Constitution, so judges, magistrates and ministers will be elected by popular vote on the first Sunday in June of next year.
“It is already part of the Constitution (the reform), so any matter that wants to be defined in the Court or in another instance, even international, has no basis; “The people of Mexico decided and that is going to happen,” he stressed.
He explained that now the Senate will issue a call, scheduled for next October 15, in order to establish the judging persons who will participate in this electoral process.
“Major provocation”
The president of the Senate, Gerardo Fernández Noronawarned that the Court lacks legal powers to review the acts of the Legislative Branch and accused that it incurred a “major provocation.”
He accused the eight ministers who voted in favor of starting the consultation on the reform of making political decisions disguised as legal decisions, since, he said, they intend to bypass the Executive and Legislative powers and stop an electoral process that has already begun.
“The Court is invading jurisdiction and it is clear to me that this implies legal and political actions by those who have initiated this process. “They have time to stop their factious attitude,” he accused, after considering it an illegal attempt.
He asked the president of the Court, Norma Piñanot taking another step and holding her responsible for being the intellectual author of the storming of the Senate on September 10.
“They want to force us to make a determination, which we are willing to do, if they insist on violating the constitutional framework,” he warned, recalling that the vice president of the Chamber of Deputies, Sergio Gutiérrez Lunaraised the possibility of impeachment.
He explained that yesterday he tried to communicate with Piña, but when he could not speak with her he gave up looking for her because, he considered, now it is the minister who must show caution.
He added that the Senate’s legal area is analyzing, at his request, the possible errors committed by the ministers who voted in favor of starting said consultation.
He stated “with complete clarity and firmness that the election of the judges will take place on the first Sunday of June 2025, whether the Supreme Court wants it or not.”
Changes in progress
The secondary legislation for the reform of the Judiciary is 70 percent complete and will be ready in the coming days, he confirmed. Ricardo Monrealpresident of the Political Coordination Board and parliamentary leader of Morena in the Chamber of Deputies.
“The secondary and regulatory law is already very advanced (…) I would almost say that we are 70 percent of the way through the drafting of these articles; Today we are making progress and over the weekend we will do so even more,” he said.
Interviewed in San Lázaro, he pointed out that the secondary laws will specify the details on the election of judges, magistrates and ministers by popular vote.
Strike and protests continue
The plenary session of Federal Judiciary Council (CJF) determined that the suspension of work maintained by federal workers and judges will continue until next October 11, the date on which it will be analyzed again whether it continues or is lifted, with the understanding that urgent cases will continue to be attended to.
The above was agreed by a majority of four votes of the president of the Court, Norma Piña; the counselor Lilia Monica Lopez Benitez and his peers José Alfonso Montalvo Martínez and Sergio Javier Molina Martínez.
Meanwhile, around 150 workers from the Judicial Branch demonstrated outside the Court during the session in which the pending consultation presented by judges seeking to stop the reform was analyzed.
