**Guanajuato Government Challenges Judicial Reform; Minister Pérez Dayán Assigned Case**
On October 7, 2024, the Governor of Guanajuato, Libia Dennise García Muñoz Ledo, officially filed a constitutional challenge against the recent reform to the Federal Judiciary. This challenge has been accepted by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) and was assigned to Minister Juan Luis González Alcántara Carrancá for further review.
This challenge, labeled as controversy 286/2024, targets the actions of the Union Congress and local legislative bodies that approved the judicial reform. On the same day, during their session, the Supreme Court justices reached a decision against dismissing consultations on the reform, with an 8 to 3 vote. The ministers rejected the initial proposals for consultation dismissal, put forth by Yasmín Esquivel Mossa and Lenia Batres Guadarrama, which were deemed irrelevant as they dealt with precautionary measures.
The session saw discussions on several projects by Minister Esquivel Mossa (5/2024, 6/2024, and 7/2024), which argued against the consideration of the constitutionality of the reform. However, Minister González Alcántara Carrancá highlighted the necessity of processing these petitions, citing precedents where the SCJN scrutinized constitutional reforms. “The constitutional court cannot shy away from its role as the ultimate guardian of the supreme text,” he emphasized.
Minister Loretta Ortiz Ahlf supported the project, expressing concerns about the discretionary nature of the SCJN’s review. Meanwhile, Batres Guadarrama argued that the court doesn’t have the scope to inspect constitutional matters to such an extent. Consequently, the related projects were rejected, with instructions for a new proposal from the opposing ministers.
Additionally, Minister Batres Guadarrama submitted projects (2/2024, 1/2024, and 3/2024) addressing the inadmissibility of applying precautionary measures to these challenges, stating that neither the Constitution nor the SCJN’s Organic Law empowers the court’s Presidency to enact such measures due to contentions, nor does it permit the suspension figure in the Amparo Law.
The Supreme Court has tasked Minister Alberto Gelacio Pérez Dayán with the controversy, where it’s to be decided whether the SCJN can assess, moderate, or nullify the judicial reform based on Article 11, Section XVII of the Organic Law of the Federal Judicial Branch, which safeguards the PJF’s autonomy and independence.
—
**Secondary Article: Judicial Reform Faces Wider Scrutiny Across Mexico**
The challenge to the recent judicial reform by the Government of Guanajuato adds to a growing list of objections surfacing across Mexico. Various states and legal bodies have voiced concerns over the potential implications these reforms could have on the balance of power within the country’s judicial system.
Legal analysts suggest that the tension around the reform centers on suspicions that it might undermine judicial independence, a stance echoed by several human rights organizations and legal institutions. Critics warn that by centralizing power, the reform could compromise the judiciary’s ability to act independently of political influences, a critical aspect of maintaining checks and balances in democratic governance.
Furthermore, this judicial shakeup has prompted discussions among lawmakers about the potential need for constitutional amendments to redefine judiciary functions and protect the independence of the courts. As the situation unfolds, both national and international legal communities are keeping a close watch on the progress of these developments in Mexico, as their outcomes could set significant precedents for judicial operations in the country.