Judicial Reform Stalled by Court

Third Collegiate Court in Morelos confirms suspension, halting judicial reform debate. Judge’s actions spark political trials consideration. Federal functionaries criticize decisions affecting reform. Stay tuned for updates on the controversy.

### Tribunal Confirms Suspension of Morelos Judge to Halt Judicial Reform Discussion

On September 4, 2024, the Third Collegiate Court in Administrative and Criminal matters in the state of Morelos unanimously confirmed the provisional suspension ordered by Martha Eugenia Magaña López, head of the Fifth District Court of Morelos. This suspension, initially administered on August 31, 2024, prohibits the Chamber of Deputies from initiating discussions or voting on the bill to reform the Federal Judicial Branch (PJF). The judgment aims to protect four federal judges who filed for an injunction.

The decision to confirm the suspension was supported by judges Silvia Carrasco Corona, Yolanda Velázquez Rebollo, and Juan Pablo Bonifaz Escobar, who collectively dismissed the complaint brought forth by the Chamber of Deputies.

Ricardo Monreal Ávila, head of the Political Coordination Board (JUCOPO) in the Chamber of Deputies, announced on September 2, 2024, that they would withhold the requests for political trials and criminal charges against the judges who granted provisional suspensions against the discussion of the judicial reform.

The suspension issued by Martha Eugenia Magaña López ordered that the discussion or voting on the reform proposal, which intends to impose elections for renewing the Federal Judicial Branch starting in 2025, not proceed. Her decision was based on the claim that the reform would dismiss the federal judges without hearings or any form of compensation.

In related developments, Judge Felipe Consuelo Soto of the Third District Court in Amparo and Federal Trials in Chiapas granted an indirect injunction to other judges who also challenged this judicial reform, putting a stop to forwarding the bill to state legislatures pending a final decision.

### Additional News on the Judicial Reform Controversy

#### Morena Considers Political Trials Against Judges Over Reform Halt

The Morena party, led by Ricardo Monreal Ávila, is contemplating the initiation of political trials against the judges who issued suspensions halting the judicial reform discussion. Monreal emphasized that such suspensions were an overreach and a direct violation of constitutional authority by interfering with the legislative process. Although potential political trials and criminal charges were considered, Monreal called for prudence and dialogue to resolve the matter, stating that “prudence and tolerance help the country.”

#### Federal Functionaries Criticize Judicial Decisions

On September 3, 2024, Luis Rodríguez Bucio, head of the Subsecretariat of Public Security under the Secretariat of Security and Civilian Protection, criticized judges Magaña López and Consuelo Soto for their suspensions. During the ‘Zero Impunity’ report in a presidential conference, Rodríguez Bucio highlighted the impact of these suspensions, which aimed to protect the federal judges from what could be perceived as irreversible harm due to the proposed reforms.

The interventions of the judges have sparked a significant debate on the independence of the judiciary versus legislative authority. Despite the criticisms, the judiciary’s actions reflect an ongoing struggle to balance reform initiatives with the rights and protections of those within the judicial system.

For further updates on this evolving story, stay tuned to TJGringo.com.