### Minister Proposes Admitting Appeals Against Judicial Reform; Yasmín Opposes It
The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) in Mexico revealed on September 24, 2024, the projects addressing whether the court has jurisdiction to review the recent reform of the Federal Judicial Power (PJF).
Minister Yasmín Esquivel Mossa proposed that the SCJN admit the consultation but determine it lacks the authority to review constitutional amendments. Her colleague, Lenia Batres Guadarrama, has yet to present her project on the same issue, despite receiving it on September 5, 2024.
“Although this Tribunal Pleno deems it appropriate for the SCJN’s Presidency to consult the full court on how to proceed with the request from the applicants, their claim is evidently inadmissible and must be dismissed,” stated Esquivel Mossa in her project on consultation 5/2024.
Conversely, Minister Juan Luis González Alcántara Carrancá suggested admitting the consultations for the SCJN’s full court to review the constitutionality and appropriateness of the judicial reform proposed by President Andrés Manuel López Obrador. He introduced consultation 4/2024 and suggested converting it into a controversy as outlined in Article 11, Section 17 of the Organic Law of the PJF, granting the SCJN authority to resolve internal conflicts in the Federal Judicial Power.
“It is deemed appropriate to redirect the request by the federal judges to a clearer and more precise normative basis for addressing their request. This Tribunal Pleno considers the legal framework of the Organic Law of the Federal Judicial Power, which establishes that the SCJN will always safeguard the autonomy of judicial organs,” said Alcántara Carrancá.
SCJN President Norma Lucía Piña Hernández issued a new consultation to her colleagues on September 18, 2024, regarding the appropriateness of a controversy brought by the National Association of Federal Circuit Magistrates and District Judges (JUFED) to suspend the implementation of the judicial reform endorsed by President López Obrador on September 15, 2024.
The JUFED cited alleged irregularities during the legislative process and concerns over the reform’s material content. Considering the matter urgent, it was assigned to Minister Juan Luis González Alcántara Carrancá for project development.
“The Tribunal is consulted on the appropriateness of the controversy outlined in Article 11, Section XXII, of the Organic Law of the Federal Judicial Power to contest constitutional reforms, whether due to legislative procedural formalities or their material content,” the SCJN stated in a notice.
President of the SCJN Norma Lucía Piña Hernández opened two consultations on September 5, 2024, to have the full court determine whether the judicial reform process should be suspended.
Juana Fuentes Velázquez, the national director of JUFED, requested on September 3, 2024, that the SCJN comment on the respect for judicial independence and the decree of judicial reform to suspend and potentially invalidate the process.
Fuentes Velázquez argued in a document that the reform threatened the autonomy and independence of the Federal Judicial Power, urging the SCJN to use its authority under Article 11, Section XVII, of the Organic Law of the PJF. She also called for an urgent procedure due to an impending debate on the general reform proposal that coincided with a planned work stoppage by SCJN employees.
The PAN parliamentary group in the Chamber of Deputies filed an indirect amparo lawsuit on September 24, 2024, against the legislative process involving the judicial reform. Deputy Héctor Saúl Téllez, representing 71 legislators, argued that there were significant procedural flaws in how the reform was approved.
### Secondary Article: PAN Files Lawsuit Against Judicial Reform Process
On September 24, 2024, Mexico’s PAN parliamentary group in the Chamber of Deputies filed an indirect amparo lawsuit against the judicial reform process. Deputy Héctor Saúl Téllez revealed that significant procedural irregularities warranted the appeal.
The amparo, representing the entire 71-member faction, argued severe flaws in the legislative process, particularly noting that 80% of deputies in the current LXVII Legislature had neither knowledge nor participation in the preceding Legislature’s dictaminating activities.
In an interview, Téllez criticized the reform’s mandate for direct elections of judges, magistrates, and ministers, highlighting deficiencies such as inadequate legislative engagement and potential impacts on judicial independence.
This new lawsuit adds another layer of judicial scrutiny to the controversial reform, indicating ongoing legal and legislative battles affecting the future of Mexico’s judicial system.