MEXICO CITY (CN) — Mexico’s Supreme Court on Thursday struck down the second part of the president’s backup plan to his controversial electoral reform, invalidating the initiative in full.
Nine of the court’s 11 justices voted to reverse a second set of legislation meant to reform Mexico’s electoral laws that President Andrés Manuel López Obrador called his “Plan B” to the constitutional amendment he initially wanted.
The plan was actually two different reforms that passed through Congress at separate times, resulting in two legal challenges. The court invalidated the first part of the reform in May, citing the undue speed at which it was pushed through Congress, which did not allow for sufficient debate.
Justices cited similar violations to the legislative process in Thursday’s ruling.
“It’s clear, evident that the principle of democratic deliberation was violated, because there was no way for the legislators to even get a superficial understanding of the text on which they were voting,” said presiding Justice Javier Laynez Potisek.
In both Thursday’s decision and the one in May, the only two dissenting votes came from López Obrador appointees Loretta Ortiz Ahlf and Yasmín Esquivel Mossa, whom critics have accused of favoring the projects of the executive branch.
Calling the court’s reviews of the legislation “superficial examinations,” Esquivel said that voting to invalidate the reform detracts from the court’s creditability. She is currently embroiled in a plagiarism scandal that has put her own credibility in doubt.
Legal scholars hailed the decision as a win for jurisprudence in Mexico.
The court was right to shoot down the reform that was “plagued by unconstitutionalities,” according to Javier Martín Reyes, a law professor at Mexico’s National Autonomous University. He also hailed the political significance of the decision ahead of next year’s presidential and congressional elections.
“The most important thing is that the 2024 elections will be conducted with the rules from before Plan B, which are very important for guaranteeing a genuine electoral competition,” he said.
Political analysts largely agreed with his analysis, highlighting the decision’s significance in terms of institutionalism in Mexico’s federal government.
Enrique Gutiérrez Márquez, a political science professor at the Ibero-American University, said the decision “strengthens Mexican democracy in terms of the separation of powers,” but said that there are still issues that need to be addressed in the country’s electoral authorities.
The main concern, he said, is the size and cost of the National Electoral Institute, something the Plan B reform aimed to reduce. Still, other aspects like broad cuts to the institute’s staff presented problems for him.
“There were very positive things and very complicated things in the reform,” Gutiérrez said.
Others expressed their approval of the decision in much more ebullient terms.
“The Supreme Court might have just saved Mexican democracy,” said political analyst Carlos Bravo Regidor of the Mexico City-based think take CIDE.
The decision will help lend trustworthiness to the upcoming elections, Bravo said, but will also make the Supreme Court more of a target for López Obrador.
After Justice Laynek announced in March that he was bringing the first suit before the court, the president announced a “Plan C” to his backup plan. It consists of voting for his ruling Morena party in general elections.
“López Obrador will say that the court has become an obstacle for his so-called transformation and that it needs to be reformed, justices need to be changed, new justices need to be appointed, or maybe even elected, so that’s why Mexicans should vote and give his party a constitutional majority so that they can get rid of this focus of resistance that the court has become in his reading,” said Bravo.
López Obrador’s office did not respond to a request for comment.
Morena politicians have already floated the idea of electing Supreme Court justices by popular vote, rather than political appointment.
“The Supreme court has fulfilled its mission,” said Bravo. “I think it has saved Mexican democracy, and Morena has no one to blame but themselves, even though they’re going to blame the Supreme Court.”
Follow @copycopeland
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
