**Morena Proposes Amendment to Limit Constitutional Challenges; TEPJF Supports Election of Judges**
On October 22, 2024, legislative groups from Morena in the Mexican Senate and the Chamber of Deputies introduced a constitutional reform initiative aimed at amending Articles 105 and 107. Their proposal seeks to prevent constitutional modifications from being challenged, even if subjected to appeals or actions of unconstitutionality.
The initiative to amend Article 105 specifies, “Constitutional controversies or actions of unconstitutionality intending to dispute additions or reforms to this Constitution, including its legislative and voting processes, as well as those aiming to dispute decisions or declarations by electoral authorities, are inadmissible.”
Regarding Article 107, the proposal articulates, “Rulings in amparo trials will only address complainants who have requested it, strictly aiming to shield and protect, if warranted, in specific instances related to the complaint. In the case of amparo trials that determine unconstitutionality of general norms, judgments rendered will not have general effects.”
During a meeting with Luisa María Alcalde Luján—president of Morena’s National Executive Committee—Ricardo Monreal Ávila, Morena’s coordinator in the Chamber of Deputies, stated that he and his Senate counterpart, Adán Augusto López Hernández, would be submitting this initiative. Monreal claimed that the Federal Judiciary had dared to ignore the Constitution by issuing “arrogant acts that are overreaching, unreasonable, and unconstitutional.”
“This reform has been challenged recently, and attempts are being made to circumvent our constitutional tradition; we will neither admit nor allow this. Today, I can tell you that Senatorial Coordinator Adán Augusto and I have decided to present a legislative initiative in constitutional matters to reaffirm the constitutional supremacy and reforming power, because we are permanent constituents,” said Monreal.
On the same day, Felipe de la Mata Pizaña, a magistrate of the Electoral Tribunal of the Federal Judiciary (TEPJF), proposed a project allowing the National Electoral Institute (INE) to continue organizing the election of judges, magistrates, and ministers, scheduled for the first Sunday in June 2025.
The project argues that “suspending the electoral procedures under the INE’s responsibility is constitutionally unviable,” though it still requires deliberation and voting in the TEPJF’s Superior Chamber.
The magistrate emphasized that actions related to the organization of the electoral process for the renewal of branches of government cannot be halted by the electoral authority, as they stem from a mandate and powers explicitly conferred by the Constitution.
Felipe de la Mata Pizaña concluded that suspending the implementation of electoral procedures by INE is “constitutionally unviable” while a constitutionally imposed norm remains, warning that halting these processes would paralyze state entities responsible for organizing elections and resolving ensuing disputes.
**Secondary Article: New Developments on Electoral Procedures and Judiciary Reforms**
Recent developments surrounding electoral and judiciary reforms continue to unfold in Mexico. The proposed amendments by Morena have sparked significant debate and discussion across political and legal spheres. The initiative not only seeks to solidify what Morena terms as “constitutional supremacy” but also addresses the growing tension between legislative decisions and judiciary reviews.
Critics argue that curtailing challenges to constitutional reforms could undermine checks and balances, potentially centralizing power and limiting judicial oversight. Proponents view the initiative as a necessary measure to prevent judicial interference in legislative processes.
As the reforms proceed, the focus also shifts to the upcoming elections of judges, magistrates, and ministers. TEPJF’s recent support for INE organizing these elections underlines the critical role of judicial independence and electoral integrity amid ongoing political reforms.
Observers are keenly watching these developments, as they could significantly shape the landscape of Mexico’s judicial and electoral systems in the coming years. As discussions and decisions progress, the balance between legislative authority and judicial review remains a pivotal point of consideration.