Mexican Supreme Court Research Articles

VOTING PROTOCOLS AS INFORMAL JUDICIAL INSTITUTIONS: THE POLITICS OF ENFORCEABILITY AND STRATEGIC BREACHING

AbstractConstitutional courts operate under a framework of formal and informal rules. While formal rules have been extensively studied, our understanding of informal rules remains limited. Courts often rely on internal practices, traditions and unwritten customs developed over time, posing a significant challenge due to their hidden nature. Numerous constitutional courts lack detailed voting protocols in their statutes and internal regulations, leaving essential aspects to the court's discretion, such as, inter alia, the voting order, deliberation style, outcome versus issue voting and tie-breaking protocols. By employing a case study of strategic breaching of informal voting protocols in the Mexican Supreme Court, this article highlights the complexity of enforcing informal voting rules given that external actors may be unaware of them, along with other factors. Even when informal rules are broadly known, certain circumstances may diminish the efficacy of informal sanctions addressing their breach. Thus, key judicial players, such as chief justices or judge-rapporteurs, may take advantage of the informal rules of voting protocols to advance their policy preferences.

Decriminalization of Abortion by the Mexican Supreme Court

Decriminalization of Abortion by the Mexican Supreme Court

The Food-Water Nexus in the Post-Revolutionary Mexican Supreme Court

The Food-Water Nexus in the Post-Revolutionary Mexican Supreme Court

Air Passenger Rights Case Law Developments from 1 January to 25 November 2023

From 1 January to 15 November 2023, there have been limited case developments in relation to air passenger rights. The first part of this article highlights recent decisions from the Court of Justice of theEuropean Union that have shed light on the interpretation of EU Regulation No 261/2004. The second part presents a non-exhaustive overview of selected significant rulings from non-EU countries. In the case Austrian Airlines v. TW, the Court defined the rules applicable to rerouted flights in the context of the coronavirus crisis. In the case FW v. LATAM Airlines Group SA (Latam Airlines), the Court clarified the rules applicable to passengers denied boarding. In the case TAP Portugal v. flightright GmbH and Myflyright GmbH, the Court ruled that passengers are entitled to compensation following a flight cancellation as the death of a crew member away from the airline’s base is not an extraordinary situation. In the case Lufthansa v. Vadhera, an Indian Court decided that moral damages may be awarded for lost and delayed luggage in the absence of any physical injury suffered by a passenger. The Mexican Supreme Court recently declared a provision of the national Civil Aviation law unconstitutional and declared that airlines must compensate passengers denied boarding due to overbooked flights with at least 25% of the ticket price, regardless of the different options offered to them. The District Tribunal of New Zealand awarded damages to a passenger as it found an airline liable of misrepresentation and set a precedent in the way airlines promote their inflight experiences. passenger rights, flight delay, flight cancellation, flight compensation, overbooking, extraordinary circumstances, repatriation flight, luggage, moral damages, misrepresentation, aviation sector, aviation law, air law

The Mexican Supreme Court and its Contributions to Democratic Transition. An Approach from Legal Philosophy

This paper deals with the contributions of the Supreme Court to the democratization of the Mexican political system in the years between 1995 and 2011. It presents the results of a broad research in which I analyzed relevant cases and conducted in-depth interviews with chief justices, researchers and politicians. Although judicial politics has emphasized the role of the judiciary within the political systems, I am interested in studying whether or not the Mexican Supreme Court has contributed to democratic transition from a legal philosophy approach. My argument is that if judges adjudicate based on theories of law, and if theories of law can affect democracy, therefore, courts’ sentences and their philosophical core may have an impact on democracy. This could be of relevance because it operationalizes philosophical categories. Such correlation between theories of law and democracy is reflected on the interpretation used by the Supreme Court. The major conclusion is that when the Supreme Court started to use new forms of argumentation related to natural law, it happened to be a contribution to democracy.

Paridad de género y representación. El caso mexicanoGender parity and representation. The Mexican case

Abstract This article will critically reflect on the jurisprudence of the Mexican Supreme Court of Justice regarding the constitutional principle of gender parity. To do so, it will rely on a theoretical reconstruction of three different foundations of the principle, based on the understanding of the political representation of women and the principle of equality. I will call these positions: “of formal equality,” “of the defense of quotas,” and “of parity,” highlighting how the arguments of the last two positions are mixed in the Mexican judgments in a disorderly and incoherent way. Finally, the article will promote an interpretation of the principle of gender parity as dynamic and therefore open to progressive contributions from the feminist political subject, avoiding both the risks of essentialism and reinforcing the binary system of sexes. This principle requires, at this historical moment, corrective, provisional, and strategic affirmative action measures to achieve substantive gender equality in political representation.

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

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.

An Invitation to Mexican Courts to Engage with Transnational Sources of Law

In 2009, Mexican Courts started to engage in a transnational conversation between foreign courts. After Mexico was sentenced by the Inter- American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) in the case of Radilla Pacheco, the Mexican Supreme Court determined, among other things, that all national judges must examine the human rights interpretations issued by the Federal Judiciary and the IACHR, choosing the most favorable and effective interpretation to protect human rights, applying the pro homine principle. Nonetheless, nothing has been said about using case law from foreign courts as persuasive authority to find this “most favorable and effective interpretation of human rights” in Mexico. This article analyses whether Mexican courts should take into account the interpretations of foreign courts as persuasive authority when determining standards and scope of human rights, besides IACHR case law. I evaluate different theories that support the use and citation of foreign precedents, as well as arguments that raise concerns about citing foreign courts to interpret domestic legal frameworks. I conclude that, in order to make use of the most effective principles and standards of human rights, as the pro persona principle suggest, Mexican Courts should consider foreign case law.

John Hart Ely in the Mexican Supreme Court

Abstract In this article, I reflect upon the influence that John Hart Ely’s book Democracy and Distrust can have on our discussions about the Mexican Supreme Court. For that purpose, I distinguish the Mexican Court’s role under authoritarian rule and in democracy. In the former era, Ely’s theory would not have even been considered. In the latter, the Court has adopted a substantive conception of democracy and judicial review based on authors such as Ronald Dworkin, Robert Alexy, and Luigi Ferrajoli. Moreover, in the last twelve years, the Court has developed a human rights agenda. During this time, it has interpreted human rights and economic liberties, issuing rulings that are similar to those that preoccupied Ely forty years ago (Lochner v. New York or Roe v. Wade). In this regard, Ely’s theory is useful to think about the current situation of constitutional justice in Mexico, even if we do not embrace his proposal that limits the role of the Court to procedural issues. In a country such as Mexico, where the reality of our democracy is much feebler and deep economic and social inequalities predominate, the Court is compelled to play a transformative role.

De directores y orquestas: análisis comparado de la posición institucional del Consejo de la Judicatura Federal en México

En el presente artículo se analiza la posición institucional del Consejo de la Judicatura Federal en México. Se argumenta que su posición actual tiene una clara dependencia de la Suprema Corte y que carece de medios que garanticen su autonomía e independencia. Para tales efectos, se estudia en una perspectiva comparada ciertas medidas tendentes a fortalecer su autonomía institucional, como el fortalecimiento de su posición constitucional, la elección de sus miembros, la designación de su presidente y el régimen de impugnación de sus decisiones. Se argumenta que el régimen adoptado por la reciente reforma constitucional de 2021 atiende las problemáticas sólo parcialmente ya que, por un lado, dejó importantes problemas sin resolver y, por el otro, inclusive, genera nuevas incógnitas.

Mexican Supreme Court at Crossroads: Three Acts of Constitutional Politics

Abstract Since 2018, Mexico’s Supreme Court is facing a critical juncture. The new distribution of political power and the distinctive platform of the governing coalition endowed with massive popular support has forced the Court to redefine its role as a constitutional tribunal within unprecedented dynamics of constitutional politics. Such juncture can be summarized as being at crossroads, between desirable affirmation, strategic accommodation and concerning subordination.

Legal Guerilla: Jurisdiction, Time, and Abortion Access in Mexico City

Abstract This article traces the emergence of a new politics of jurisdiction in legal abortion debates in Mexico. It analyzes how jurisdictional claims work as a kind of lawfare from “above” and “below” examining: 1) how the Mexican Supreme Court invoked technicalities of jurisdiction to settle the constitutional conflict over the decriminalization of abortion in Mexico City, and 2) how a feminist litigator reappropriated the court's formal principles of legality toward their own ends in what they call “legal guerilla.” Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork in Mexico City, the author explores how competing jurisdictions create ambiguous spaces and temporalities of inclusion and exclusion from legality and clinical care. In closing, she argues that feminist activists who work to create access and people who seek abortion enact their own forms of “legal guerilla” as they move through these overlapping and contradictory legalities.

Mexican apex judiciary and its multiple interpretations: Challenges for the constitutional right to health

Abstract The judicialization of social rights is a reality in Latin America; however, little has been said about this phenomenon in Mexico or about the role of the Mexican Supreme Court (Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, SCJN) in advancing an effective guarantee of the right to health. In several countries, courts have adopted either an active role in defining health policy and protecting the right to health or a passive one. Studying the ways in which health-related cases are resolved in Mexico enables us to evaluate the role of the SCJN when ruling for or against this right. This article aims to determine whether the SCJN, through the analysis of its rulings, is or could be a catalyst for change in the healthcare system. This article reports on the results of a systematic content analysis of twenty-two SCJN rulings, examining the claimants, their claims as understood by the SCJN, and the elements considered by the justices in their decision-making process. The analysis of the way in which the SCJN ruled in these cases demonstrates that the SCJN must be uniform and consistent in applying constitutional and conventional principles to improve predictability of its decisions and to be innovative in responding to the new requirements posed by economic, social, and cultural rights. The SCJN should increase its possibilities of promoting structural reforms where laws or policies are inconsistent with constitutional or conventional standards by maintaining a middle ground with respect of the executive and legislative branches.

Voluntad procreacional: presupuesto para la filiación derivada de procedimientos de reproducción humana asistida en el contexto mexicano

El artículo expone la situación de la reproducción humana asistida en países latinoamericanos y en México, así como la regulación de la filiación derivada de estos procedi-mientos en el contexto mexicano y la importancia de la voluntad procreacional para determinar la filiación. Finalmente, destaca algunas resoluciones de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos y de la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación en México, en torno al tema.

El derecho de identidad de personas transgénero en procedimientos de corrección de actas del registro civil. Una propuesta de sentencia estructural de la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación

El derecho a la identidad es un derecho humano de suma importancia. Las personas de la comunidad trans han encontrado obstáculos para corregir sus documentos personales a fin de adecuarlos a la identidad de género que viven. La falta de normas jurídicas y el dictado de sentencias individuales de amparo han mostrado la insuficiente protección de los derechos de este grupo social, que usualmente padece discriminación. Esta investigación propone que la Suprema Corte mexicana, ejerciendo como tribunal constitucional, emita una sentencia estructural que haga visible la necesidad de regular el tema. A través de los contenidos constitucionales que actualmente están previstos en la Constitución mexicana, es posible emitir un fallo de esa naturaleza.

Estado regulador, discrecionalidad técnica y jurisdicción especializada bajo el derecho energético mexicano

Las reformas constitucionales en materia de competencia economica, telecomunicaciones y energia vinieron a generar cambios profundos en los paradigmas legales tradicionales. Uno de ellos es el principio de la division de poderes, el cual ahora es modulado a traves de la teoria del Estado regulador, cuya creacion obedece a la jurisprudencia emitida por la Suprema Corte de Justicia mexicana. En la reforma estructural de competencia economica y telecomunicaciones, se implemento un modelo de jurisdiccion especializada, no asi para el caso de la reforma en materia de energia del 2013. Sin embargo, el modelo de jurisdiccion especializada se aplica, en materia energetica, para ciertos casos especificos y por analogia, a fin de resolver las controversias derivadas de la regulacion emitida por los reguladores. Se identifica una relacion simbiotica entre la discrecionalidad tecnica y la deferencia judicial. Por tal motivo, debe existir un equilibrio de poder entre los organos reguladores y los juzgados especializados.

Delitos restrictivos de la libertad de expresión y su inconstitucionalidad. Análisis de tres casos resueltos por la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación

En el presente artículo se analiza la existencia de tipos penales en el orden jurídico mexicano que restringen la libertad de expresión y que se encuadran en la categoría de restricciones indirectas, la cuales están prohibidas por la Constitución. Se afirma que estos delitos tienen un efecto inhibidor de la difusión de opiniones, ideas e información en México, por generar un tipo de autocensura al prohibir, perseguir y sancionar conductas relacionadas con la obtención y difusión de información, así como otras formas de expresión. Para demostrar esta tesis, en primer término se conceptualiza la libertad de expresión y su importancia destacando sus dimensiones: individual y social. Enseguida se hacen aproximaciones conceptuales de la censura, la censura previa y la autocensura como especies de restricciones a la libertad de expresión. Finalmente, se plantea de manera ejemplificativa la revisión de tres casos resueltos por la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación de México, en los cuales se declaró la inconstitucionalidad de este tipo de delitos.

Los rumbos jurisprudenciales de la interpretación conforme: alcances y límites sobre su aplicación en la Corte Suprema mexicana

A la luz del trabajo jurisprudencial desarrollado por la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación durante los últimos años, el presente texto aborda la manera en que la interpretación conforme ha transitado por caminos diversos, algunas veces sin rumbo fijo, y otras veces por rutas que pretenden su reorientación funcional. Para ello, expone la evolución que esta herra-mienta ha tenido no sólo de manera cronológica, sino también de manera más política y jurídica a la luz del impacto que ciertas decisiones han tenido en el devenir de la doctrina jurisprudencial de la Corte mexicana sobre este tema, y en especial en la transición hacia un pensamiento jurídico más flexible e innovador.

Hacia un nuevo sistema de enjuiciamiento laboral

La Constitución de 1917 integró los derechos esenciales de los trabajadores y estableció en la fracción XX del artículo 123 a las Juntas de Conciliación y Arbitraje como órganos resolutorios. Su naturaleza la definió la Suprema Corte al considerarlas tribunales con plena jurisdicción para conocer y resolver conflictos individuales y colectivos de trabajo, en tanto que su integración, funcionamiento y competencia la regularon las leyes federales de 1931 y 1970.No obstante las múltiples reformas sufridas por el artículo 123, la fracción XX permaneció intocada hasta la de 24 de febrero de 2017, que sienta las bases de un nuevo sistema de enjuiciamiento con dos ejes rectores: obligación de patrones y trabajadores de asistir a la instancia conciliadora antes de acudir a los tribunales laborales, y solución de los conflictos por tribunales federales o locales, lo que implica la desaparición de las juntas.De

El naciente derecho laboral mexicano: 1891-1928

This essay shows the ideological and doctrinal sources that prepared the way for the so-called social constitutionalism in Mexico since the end of the 19th century. Very close to the current European social issue, the Mexican liberals discussed the protection of workers and the dignity of work, disclosing free recruitment and free exercise of the profession enacted at the old article 5 of the Constitution of 1857, from subordinated and salaried work of the new article 123 of the Constitution of 1917. A mixture of libertarian and Catholic ideas and some other external influences led to the foundational and controversial debate of registering as a constitutional norm, the protection of the social and economic rights of the manufacturing and agricultural workers, which snatched judicial control, in civil matters, (which was common in other countries of America) of lawsuits arising from the recruitment, permanence and dismissal of workers, which passed to the scope of the Conciliation and Arbitration Boards under the control of the revolutionary executive of 1917. The essay shows, with original and little consulted sources, that the ideological and doctrinal influences that were behind the writing of the article of work in Mexico were in some times against the attribution of judicial law, the Amparo, in hands of the Mexican Supreme Court, despite the fact that the executive power maintained until the current reforms of 2018-2019, the control of those conciliation and arbitration boards. With the reforms of 1928 and the first Federal Labor Law of 1931, labor matters became a norm of political control of the executive power, inaugurating a kind of mass politics and unions control managed by General Cardenas government (1934-1940).It also highlights the strong influence of the libertarian and anarchist ideas of the political newspaper Regeneration of Ricardo Flores Magon in the doctrinal body of section VI of the new article 123, which the literature known until today tends to insinuate more from the Catholic perspective of Rerum Novarum.