Unpublished: SCJN will submit constitutional reform to the PJ for review

Mexico City. For the first time, the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) will review a constitutional reform. This Thursday, by a majority of eight votes to three, it admitted one of the challenges by judges and magistrates against the reform of the Judicial Branch of the Federation (PJF) to determine if the high court can review the constitutional amendment and even stop it.

The matter caused a clash of positions in the session, because while the majority in favor argued that the Court is not yet making a “substantive” decision on the reform, the group against warned that it is preparing to deliver a “coup of State”.

The Plenary approved the project of Minister Juan Luis González Alcántara Carrancá, which corrected the plan to the challenge of the judging persons on the grounds that the legal means of analysis they proposed “was not ideal”, but instead proposed that the discussion be through one of the controversies provided for in article 11, section XVII, of the Organic Law of the PJF.

With today’s ruling, Minister President Norma Lucía Piña Hernández will turn the project over to another minister of the majority in favor, excluding those who voted against, to prepare a project on said challenges; It could also issue a suspension asking to stop the constitutional amendment.

“Therefore, the project concludes that the procedure to be followed must be for the Minister President to issue an agreement in which she redirects the petition of the promoters and that it is transferred to the minister who corresponds by law so that the project is prepared in which the merits of the respective request are examined”, Alcántara Carrancá.

In favor of the project were the Minister President Piña Hernández, the speaker González Alcántara Carrancá, Jorge Mario Pardo Rebolledo, Margarita Ríos Farjat, Alfredo Gutiérrez Ortiz Mena, Luis María Aguilar Morales and Javier Laynez Potisek.

Ministers Lenia Batres Guadarrama, Yasmín Esquivel Mossa and Loretta Ortiz Ahlf voted against. The first togada stated that the Court does not have the power to review changes to the Constitution approved by the Legislative Branch because it would violate “the principle of constitutional supremacy, as well as the division of powers and the Constitutional Rule of Law.”

“The SCJN would be carrying out an authentic coup d’état by attempting to subject to constitutional control the work of the reforming power, which has participated in the process of constitutional reform in matters of the Judiciary in strict compliance with what is ordered in constitutional article 39, which establishes that all public power emanates from the people and is instituted for the benefit of them, who at all times have the inalienable right to alter or modify the form of their government,” he highlighted.

Meanwhile, Minister Esquivel Mossa stressed that the Constitution is not challengeable and expressed that she is concerned about processing several files that are subject to review “whether a constitutional reform is constitutional or not.”

“This is a preamble to a constitutional coup d’état of law. The Court wants to ignore the reforming power of the Constitution. “He wants to create an unacceptable constitutional crisis, sending the message that this Court can overthrow a constitutional reform in an administrative procedure provided for in the organic law of the Judicial Branch of the Federation,” he added.

Among the arguments in favor, Minister Jorge Mario Pardo Rebolledo argued that there is no notorious and undoubted cause that leads to rejecting the challenges made by members of the PJF.

“We will discuss it. If this reaches that stage, we will analyze the arguments that are supported there. I certainly do not advance any criteria because this is not the time to do so. What I do maintain is that my vote will be in favor of the meaning of the project, separating myself from various considerations and with some additional ones, always from the perspective that it is a consultation in process regarding a request received and that the presidency of this Supreme Court puts it for the consideration of the people,” he said.