### CJF to Report Judges Who Halted Judicial Reform to FGR
The Federal Judiciary Council (CJF) is set to report to the Attorney General’s Office (FGR) the judges who granted suspensions and amparos, aiming to stall judicial reforms. Recently, a press conference revealed that magistrates accused councilors Bernardo Bátiz, Verónica de Gyvés Zárate, Celia Maya García, and Sergio Javier Molina Martínez, who form the “official majority” in the CJF, of deciding on February 12, 2025, to notify the FGR against Sergio Santamaría Chamú, leader of the First District Court in Michoacán, Morelia. An investigation is already underway against him.
Gabriela Ruiz Márquez, head of the Sixth District Court in Administrative Matters in Zapopan, Jalisco, is also included. Márquez granted the first amparo against the Federal Judiciary’s reform on December 10, 2024, annulling the actions of the legislative process, which would also nullify subsequent acts.
Julia María del Carmen García González described the CJF’s actions as a betrayal of its role to ensure judicial independence and support the judiciary’s effectiveness by prosecuting judges for their discretionary decisions.
Federal judges held their last press conference on February 14, 2025, considering that the previous day’s Supreme Court ruling marked “the death of the Republic” by enabling the implementation of judicial reform.
García González expressed concern about potential repercussions for judges who oppose the political powers’ agenda, highlighting the establishment of a Discipline Tribunal for judges compounding the issue.
Juan José Olvera López remarked that while the Electoral Tribunal’s original charge against the judges was resolved by the Supreme Court, the CJF’s new charge alleges judicial misconduct, maintaining the threat to judicial autonomy.
Moreover, Ricardo Monreal Ávila, the coordinator of the governing Morena party in the lower house of Congress, supported the CJF’s decision, citing illegal and arbitrary conduct by the judges and stressing the importance of judicial reform for democratization and transparency.
The National Action Party (PAN) condemned the CJF’s move, viewing it as a political vendetta undermining judicial independence and intimidating judges who defend constitutional rights.
—
### Secondary Article: Judicial Reforms Spark Controversy Across Mexico
Recent judicial reforms in Mexico have sparked significant debate among lawmakers, judges, and the public. The reforms, touted as efforts to democratize the justice system, involve scrutiny of judges’ decisions and introduce popular voting in judicial appointments. Critics argue that these measures could undermine judicial independence by exposing judges to political pressures.
Following the latest Supreme Court decision supporting the reforms, the CJF’s move to report judges who halted the reform highlights the escalating tension between the judiciary and political entities. Proponents believe these measures increase accountability, while opponents warn against the erosion of judicial autonomy.
As this saga unfolds, experts and citizens continue to advocate for a more balanced approach that ensures both judicial independence and accountability, recognizing the judiciary’s critical role in upholding democracy and constitutional rights.