Mexico City. In a session that lasted six minutes, this Thursday the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) discussed and approved four constitutional controversies that invalidate the powers of four municipalities of Coahuila to collect fees for the issuance of construction and remodeling permits. and operation of wells for the extraction of any hydrocarbon, considering that federal powers are invaded.
During the session, the four projects of Minister Jorge Mario Pardo Rebolledo were approved as a package, which invalidated provisions in the aforementioned sense of the income laws of the municipalities of Nadadores, Piedras Negras, Lamadrid and Zaragoza.
In the case of the municipality of Lamadrid, the speaker clarified that the authorities only charged fees for operation, not for construction.
“I would only like to clarify that in the constitutional controversy 69/2024, listed in third place, there are permits for operation not for construction, as is the case in all the rest, so the respective adjustment will be made in the resolution and The argument would be the same in all cases, as well as the adjustments that have already been accepted and made in the precedents,” he said.
In recent months, the Court has been invalidating in other municipalities of that state said powers conferred in their respective Income laws, having been challenged by the Federal Executive Branch.
Based on these precedents, it was determined that the regulations invaded federal jurisdiction, provided for in article 73, sections , veins or deposits, among them, hydrocarbons, contemplated by article 27, fourth paragraph, of the federal Constitution itself.
Article 23, sections VIII and IX, of the Income Law of the Municipality of Nadadores were invalidated; Article 20, section I, numerals 20 and 21, of the Income Law of the Municipality of Piedras Negras; Article 22, section I, numerals 5 and 6, of the Income Law of the Municipality of Lamadrid; and Article 18, sections IX and X, of the Income Law of the Municipality of Zaragoza.
!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s)
{if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod?
n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};
if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n;n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version=’2.0′;
n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0;
t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];
s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,’script’,
‘
fbq(‘init’, ‘133913093805922’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘PageView’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘Contact’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘Donate’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘FindLocation’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘Lead’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘Search’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘Subscribe’, {value: ‘0.00’, currency: ‘MXN’, predicted_ltv: ‘0.00’});
fbq(‘track’, ‘ViewContent’);
#SCJN #invalidates #provisions #income #laws #municipalities #Coahuila
–
Good day, and welcome to another edition of World Today News. We’re delighted to have you with us today. Today, we have two esteemed guests who have extensive knowledge on the recent ruling made by the Supreme Court of Mexico regarding the invalidation of certain provisions in the income laws of four municipalities in Coahuila. Our first guest is Daniel Garcia, a legal analyst, and our second guest is Luis Perez, a former mayor of one of the affected municipalities.
Daniel, let’s begin with you. Could you please explain what does it mean for these municipalities that their powers to collect fees for construction and remodeling permits and operation of wells for the extraction of any hydrocarbon have been invalidated, and why did the Supreme Court make this decision?
Daniel Garcia: Of course. Well, it essentially means that the court has determined that these municipalities were infringinging upon federal powers by collecting these fees without proper authorization. The Supreme Court has ruled that matters related to the extraction of hydrocarbons fall under federal jurisdiction, as outlined in Article 27 of the Constitution. By attempting to collect these fees, the municipalities were encroaching upon the federal government’s authority and, therefore, their actions have been nullified.
World Today News: Understood. And Luis, as a former mayor of one of the affected municipalities, what is your reaction to this ruling? Do you agree with the court’s decision, or do you feel that your municipality had the right to collect these fees?
Luis Perez: Thank you for having me. My perspective may be biased, but I do believe that our municipality had the right to collect these fees. We saw it as a way to generate revenue and improve our infrastructure, which is the responsibility of local governments. However, I understand that there may have been some misunderstandings about our intentions and the boundaries of our authority. We did not intend to infringe upon federal powers, but rather to find ways to support our community.
World Today News: That’s an interesting insight. Daniel, how do you think this ruling will affect not only the affected municipalities but also other municipalities that may be considering similar measures?
Daniel Garcia: Well, it’s important to note that this is not the first time the Supreme Court
