Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo. Photo: Presidencia

By KELIN DILLON

Following news that Mexico’s Supreme Court Justice of the Nation (SCJN) voted in favor of opening its potential power to review the nation’s controversial – and newly approved – constitutional judicial reform, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo (CSP) pushed back against the decision during her daily morning press conference on Friday, Oct. 4, characterizing the review a ‘watered-down blow.’ 

The SCJN voted eight to three in favor of analyzing the reform, which proposes the election of all of Mexico’s judges and magistrates by popular vote, on the evening of Thursday, Oct. 3. 

The court’s vote cited Article 11, section XVII of the Organic Law of the Federal Judicial Branch as used to resolve internal conflicts, which will now be extended to external actors that could threaten the judicial branch’s independence and autonomy.

However, the fate of the constitutional reform still hangs in the balance, as a proposed analysis project must be presented to the court. Only then will it be revealed whether the SCJN will interfere in the constitutional reform or decide to leave it alone.

Ministers Yasmín Esquivel and Lenia Batres, who are close to Sheinbaum’s National Regeneration Movement (Morena) and its Fourth Transformation (4T), notably voted against the review, with Batres going as far as to accuse the Supreme Court as holding a “coup d’état.”

For her part, Sheinbaum refuted the idea that the SCJN’s decision was a true attempt to seize power, calling it a “watered-down coup, not a coup d’état.”

“The truth is, what basis does it have?” asked CSP at the time. “The reform of the judicial branch is not in danger, the people have already decided and we have the obligation to serve the people.”

Likewise, the federal executive admonished the highest court in the nation for acting out of line in its duties by allowing a potential reversal of changes to the Mexican Constitution.

“What does the Constitution say to change the Constitution? What is the vote that was obtained and why? That it has not made a decision, it accepts what the Court, some Ministers of the Court, proposes to analyze the constitutionality of the Constitution, which is totally out of line,” concluded Sheinbaum.