Constitutional controversies in the subnational democratization of Mexico, 1994–2021

Abstract

AbstractAfter the 1994 judicial reform, the Mexican Supreme Court has transformed into a more genuine enforcer of law and the final arbiter in an increasing number of disputes over power and resources between different levels and branches of government. Constitutional controversies have become an essential legal resource enabling subnational actors to defend the autonomy and jurisdiction guaranteed in the Constitution. The number of constitutional controversies filed by municipalities and subnational actors before the Court increased considerably in the 1995–2021 period, reaching nearly 2500 intergovernmental disputes of exclusive jurisdiction. In the context of growing political fragmentation, this judicialization process has motivated subnational actors to appeal regularly to the Supreme Court to act as a counterweight, resulting in an increasing influence in the national political arena and even in the implementation of public policies. With its rulings, a nonrepresentative body is regulating coexistence among elected political actors and institutionalizing new rules of behavior. The Supreme Court's rulings on fundamental cases that are still pending should reveal whether the 2021 judicial reform will enhance judicial independence.