Mexico Bill Limits Challenges

Mexican House Committee approves “Constitutional Supremacy” bill, sparking debate over potential impact on judicial independence and legislative power balance. International observers monitor developments closely.

**Mexican House Committee Approves “Constitutional Supremacy” Bill**

The Constitutional Points Committee of the Mexican Chamber of Deputies has approved, both in general and in particular, a significant legislative reform on the evening of October 29, 2024. With 30 votes in favor and 11 against, the initiative seeks to amend Article 107 and add a fifth paragraph to Article 105 of the Mexican Constitution. Spearheaded by the Morena party, this reform, dubbed “constitutional supremacy,” aims to prevent any constitutional amendments from being challenged.

The proponents of this so-called “constitutional supremacy” reform, or its label as an immunity against constitutional challenges, received backing from the political factions of Morena, the Green Ecologist Party (PVEM), and the Labor Party (PT). On the other hand, opposition to this reform was voiced by members of the National Action Party (PAN), the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), and the Citizen Movement (MC).

Following this approval, the bill has been forwarded to the Executive Board of the lower house of the Union Congress for a full discussion, which is expected to occur on Wednesday, October 29, 2024.

The Committee’s President, Leonel Godoy Rangel from Morena, confirmed that any reservations will be addressed in the Full Chamber of San Lázaro. Furthermore, he mentioned the inclusion of two particular votes at the end of the ruling project for its publication in the Parliamentary Gazette.

Nohemí Berenice Luna Ayala of the PAN argued that this urgency was merely a strategic move to outmaneuver the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN). Ruth Marisela Silva Andraca from PVEM justified the urgency by referencing a proposed sentence by Minister Juan Luis González Alcántara Carrancá, which suggests partially invalidating the Federal Judiciary’s reform.

Similarly, Rubén Ignacio Moreira Valdez from the PRI criticized the rush to pass the reform, questioning its motives against the SCJN. Irais Virginia Reyes De la Torre from the Citizen Movement argued that the reform misleads the public by stripping them of their means to challenge abuses and removing the potential to contest constitutional amendments.

Opponents argue that this move could undermine judicial independence, whereas supporters claim it curtails judicial overreach, ensuring the legislative branch retains its powers without interference from the judiciary.

**Additional Context on Mexican Political Climate**

Recent developments in Mexico’s political arena highlight a growing tension between different branches of the government. As the nation witnesses numerous contested reforms, political figures are engaged in heated debates over the balance of power.

In related news, there’s an increasing spotlight on how reforms within the judiciary and constitutional domains could shape Mexico’s political integrity. Discussions around judicial independence, legislative reach, and executive influence remain central to Mexico’s democratic discourse.

International observers are keenly watching these shifts as they could have broader implications for governance and constitutional law in Latin America. As Mexico navigates these political changes, it remains pivotal to follow how these reforms align with democratic principles and the rule of law.