Mexican Supreme Court Research Articles

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.

Mexican Supreme Court: Legislative Omission – Analysis on Congress’ Failure to Enact Legislation Regulating Official Advertising in Mexico

Abstract Last year, Mexico’s Supreme Court issued a momentous decision pertaining to the so-called legislative omission. It represented a groundbreaking judgment not only for its effects on freedom of speech and of the press and separation of powers in Mexico, but also – and perhaps more saliently- for its implications in the way in which the Court is asserting its powers in interpreting the Constitution.

La dignidad humana en México: su contenido esencial a partir de la jurisprudencia alemana y española

De acuerdo con el criterio de la Suprema Corte de Justicia mexicana, la dignidad humana es el valor constitucional supremo del ordenamiento legal. A pesar de ello, existe un desarrollo primario en la legislación mexicana y en los precedentes jurídicos. Aún así, la dignidad humana ha sido reconocida en varias de las últimas decisiones de la Suprema Corte a fin de maximizar el contenido esencial de los derechos humanos. Por tal motivo, este trabajo analiza ambas perspectivas de la dignidad humana: la comparada y la internacional, principalmente la jurisprudencia alemana, española e interamericana.

Las citas doctrinales en las sentencias de los tribunales constitucionales. Especial análisis de aquéllas incorporadas en los pronunciamientos de acción de inconstitucionalidad de la Suprema Corte de Justicia Mexicana

This article arises the framework of the general research “Courts, doctrine and inclusive society: impact of doctrinal formant on supreme courts”, funded by the italian Ministry of Education, Universities and Research.In relation to mexican case, the research it show to what extent the doctrine, the dictionaries and the encyclopedias to influence in the preamble of the sentences the action of unconstitutionality the mexican Supreme Court of Justice issued from 2001 to 2014. Also, it evidenced: what are the most cited authors?, what is the nationality of this authors?, what are the educative or government institutions to which belong the most cited authors?, who are cited more, women or men?, what are the legal and others sciences that influence in the sentences of Supreme Court?, what influence have the dictionaries and encyclopedias in the sentences?

El caso de Mariana Lima Buendía: una radiografía sobre la violencia y discriminación contra la mujer

El 25 de marzo de 2015, la Suprema Corte de Justicia mexicana emitió la sentencia relativa a la investigación de la muerte violenta de Mariana Lima Buendía, constituyendo el primer pronunciamiento de este tribunal relacionado con el feminicidio. La decisión fue el reconocimiento del derecho de las mujeres a una vida libre de violencia y discriminación, así como de la obligatoriedad de investigar y juzgar con perspectiva de género, además de un esfuerzo por brindar la reparación integral por violaciones de derechos humanos. La sentencia abre, además, varios debates, como el alcance del parámetro de control de regularidad constitucional y la pertinencia de que un tribunal constitucional analice, a detalle, una investigación ministerial, o sobre el alcance de las reparaciones a través del amparo. Así, la decisión demuestra que una sentencia de amparo puede constituir una acción reparadora y una garantía del derecho a la verdad.

Decidir, argumentar y engrosar: el caso Martín del Campo

El proceso de decisión en la Suprema Corte mexicana consiste en discutir un proyecto de resolución, llevar a cabo una deliberación y tomar una votación. Posteriormente, se encarga a uno de los ministros la elaboración de un documento que, en teoría, debe contener los argumentos que fundamentan el acuerdo alcanzado en la deliberación. Sin embargo, algunas veces el documento no coincide con lo acordado. El propósito de este trabajo es analizar en profundidad uno de estos casos y sus implicaciones en el sistema jurídico mexicano. También se aborda el tema de la falta de un pronunciamiento sobre uno de los temas centrales de la decisión: la obligatoriedad de los informes de la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos.

Unconstitutional Constitutional Amendments in Mexico: The Failure of the Guardians of the Constitution and its Implications for Constitutional Hyper-Reformism

In the field of comparative constitutional law scholars have agreed on the potential of constitutional courts to enforce democratic limitations to the political branches in new or fragile democracies. For instance, one of the ways in which constitutional courts have stopped or failed to stop tendencies to what has been called abusive constitutionalism is through the exercise of judicial review of constitutional amendments. Mexico's constitutional change reality appears as a good candidate to have a court enforcing democratic limitations to the excessive use of constitutional amendment—the constitution has gone through over 690 amendments. Yet, despite the perfect conditions (formal empowerment and power fragmentation) for becoming a strong constitutional tribunal able to exert its authority vis-a-vis the political branches, the Supreme Court has consistently refused to engage in judicial review of constitutional amendments. This paper examines how the Mexican Supreme Court has treated the claims against constitutional amendments in the last four decades and suggests how its doctrinal stance on this issue is related to the parallel phenomena of constitutional hyper-reformism.

Harmonizing national law with inter-American human rights law: Evidence from Mexico

ABSTRACTConventionality review is a recent Latin American doctrine seeking that states which had ratified the American Convention of Human Rights verify the conformity of their national laws to norms of the Convention. In Mexico, several changes have placed the country in a better position to follow this inter-American doctrine: 1) a 2011 human rights constitutional amendment; and 2) an interpretation handed down by the Mexican Supreme Court after its appraisal of the Rosendo Radilla-Pacheco case. These events allow all judges in the country (federal and local) to disregard national laws if they contravene norms established in the Convention or the Constitution. How then are these changes operating in practice? This article explores the extent to which conventionality review is being used by intermediate level court's judges and defenders in the states of Jalisco, Nuevo Leon, and Oaxaca.

Libertad de expresión y discurso homofóbico en méxico: ¿es correcta la teoría constitucional de la suprema corte?

The article discusses a recent decision by the Mexican Supreme Court whereby damage resulting from the use of discriminatory language may in certain cases appropriately counterweight freedom of speech. The ruling expresses thesis at three different levels, all of them relevant from the viewpoint of constitutional theory. First, it expresses a vision of the kind of exercise the Court should deploy when reviewing sentences in amparo: it is a maximizing vision that the author considers to be fundamentally correct. At a second and third level, with different degrees of specificity, it proposes a particular constitutional reading for the revision of the case at hand. On this count and given the relevant historic-constitutional context, the article celebrates the Court's willingness to counterweight free speech with antidiscrimination-based considerations, though in terms of the sub-rules of decision used to pin down the general reading it identifies both successes and failures.

Proportionality Analysis as an ‘Analytical Matrix’ Adopted by the Supreme Court of Mexico

This paper explores proportionality analysis as a constitutional standard that allows courts to engage in a public conversation, especially with the legislature. This conversation would consider the concept, structure and normative force of fundamental rights, the way in which two or more rights compete and collide, and as to how a particular disagreement about rights can be addressed. What is particularly appealing is the way in which this approach to proportionality analysis does not prescribe any legitimate means ‘per se’. It is relational because it must apply the means to achieve a particular aim in a real situation and decide if the sacrifice applied to a particular right is proportionate. This may eventually offer better public engagement with judicial arguments and endorse judicial independence by rendering the decision more structured, open and transparent. A further aim of this paper is to fulfill the knowledge gap about the migration of proportionality analysis as a rights adjudication mechanism to Latin America and, at the same time, make a claim for a context-sensitive approach. The hope is that judiciaries will learn from recent pitfalls that occurred under authoritarian regimes in Latin America where decisions were based upon excessive formality and disregard of relevant factors involved in rights claims. The recent adoption of proportionality analysis by the Mexican Supreme Court in 2007 has created the option of a new appraisal of its migration to Latin America.

Unity or Uniformity? Domestic Courts and Treaty Interpretation

AbstractThe role of domestic courts in the application of international law is one of the most vividly debated issues in contemporary international legal doctrine. However, the methodology of interpretation of international norms used by these courts remains underexplored. In particular, the application of the Vienna rules of treaty interpretation by domestic courts has not been sufficiently assessed so far. Three case studies (from the US Supreme Court, the Mexican Supreme Court, and the European Court of Justice) show the diversity of approaches in this respect. In the light of these case studies, the article explores the inevitable tensions between two opposite, yet equally legitimate, normative expectations: the desirability of a common, predictable methodology versus the need for flexibility in adapting international norms to a plurality of domestic environments.

Case Translation: Mexico

Jurisprudencia 24/2008, Criteria Contradiction Proceedings (Contradicción de Tesis) 261/2007 SS between the Third Collegiate Court for Administrative Matters and the Second Civil Court for Civil Matters in the Seventh Circuit, Second Chamber of the Mexican Supreme Court, February 13, 2008, with a commentary by César Martínez Alemán.

2013. Condiciones para el retiro y el desafío de la longevidad en México

In the frame of the new Jurisprudencia 85-2010, dictated by the mexican Supreme Court, the article stand out four groups of big evidence about the precarious retirement conditions that take place in IMSS, ISSSTE and SSA. With the revision of the ISS-FAM reforms 2008-2011, the article concludes with an analysis of the proposal Enrique Peña Nieto electoral campaign in order to create a “universal” social security system and the presence of a regressive New Federal Labour Law.

Using litigation to defend women prosecuted for abortion in Mexico: challenging state laws and the implications of recent court judgments

While women in Mexico City can access free, safe and legal abortion during the first trimester, women in other Mexican states face many barriers. To complicate matters, between 2008 and 2009, 16 state constitutions were amended to protect life from conception. While these reforms do not annul existing legal abortion indications, they have created additional obstacles for women. Health providers increasingly report women who seek life-saving care for complications such as haemorrhage to the police, and some cases eventually end up in court. The Grupo de Información en Reproducción Elegida (GIRE) has successfully litigated such cases in state courts, with positive outcomes. However, state courts have mainly focused on procedural issues. The Mexican Supreme Court ruling supporting Mexico City’s law has had a positive effect, but a stronger stance is needed. This paper discusses the constitutional framework and jurisprudence regarding abortion in Mexico, and the recent Costa Rica decision of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. We assert that Mexican states must guarantee women’s access to abortion on the legal grounds established in law. We continue to support litigation at the state level to oblige courts to exonerate women prosecuted for illegal abortion. Advocacy should, of course, also address the legislative and executive branches, while working simultaneously to set legal precedents on abortion.

Unconstitutionality of Article 57, Section II, Paragraph a) of the Code of Military Justice and Legitimation of the Injured Party and His Family to Present an Appeal for the Protection of Constitutional Rights

On August 21, 2012, the Mexican Supreme Court declared unconstitutional Article 57 of the Mexican Code of Military Justice (CMJ) and in doing so complied with several judgments of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (I/A Court). From the point of view of Mexican law, the Supreme Court’s decision means that civilians who have suffered from the unconstitutional expansion of military jurisdiction in Mexico are, for the first time, protected by the federal judiciary. More significant from the perspective of international law, the decision to bring Mexican law into compliance with the judgments of the I/A Court reflects growing acceptance of that Court’s judgments, and international human rights law, by the states parties to the American Convention on Human Rights (American Convention), as well as the general decline of military jurisdiction and impunity in the region.

Standing in non-use cancellations: Mexican Supreme Court misses the real target

Standing in non-use cancellations: Mexican Supreme Court misses the real target

Principio de proporcionalidad, colisión de principios y el nuevo discurso de la Suprema Corte

En el contexto del neoconstitucionalismo, el uso del principio de proporcionalidad (el “PP”) se ha convertido en la herramienta de adjudicación más dominante. Si bien el PP ha demostrado su utilidad debido, principalmente, a su flexibilidad y a su capacidad para incrementar la transparencia de las decisiones jurisdiccionales, también ha contribuido a generar una imagen de neutralidad que oscurece por el hecho de que los jueces, al resolver casos, toman decisiones políticas y no sólo aplican el derecho sino que también lo crean. El ejemplo de esta tensión se puede encontrar en diversos casos que la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación (la “Corte”) ha resuelto. Este trabajo busca analizar la manera en que la Corte utiliza el PP y sus implicaciones en nuestra vida constitucional.

The Mexican Supreme Court as a Protector of Human Rights

This article studies the behavior of Mexico’s Federal Supreme Court (Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación) (SCJN) regarding human rights during its Ninth Epoch (1995-2011). According to the empirical data obtained, after a twelve-year period (1995-2006) of inactivity in this área, the SCJN recently (2007-11) has begun to gradually take action. The change is evident in three aspects: a) the increased use and reinterpretation of its powers in Amparo proceedings; b) the increased use, interpretation and regulation of Powers of Investigation for serious violations of individual guarantees (abrogated in 2011), and; c) the inclusion of deliberative elements in preparing proceedings on grounds of unconstitutionality (Acción de Inconstitucionalidad). The change in the SCJN’s behavior towards human rights since 2007 is explained by the institutional independence it has gained in the fragmented political system in assuming the role of arbitrator in important conflicts between political actors. The SCJN has also developed strategies that legitimate its greater involvement in protecting human rights before the political system and society. In general, the political system under which the Court acts has not reacted to provoke a reversal of this tendency in favor of human rights. In the 16-year period studied here, the incremental change in the SCJN’s behavior is observed along with its evolution from a weak court with marginal participation into a court that has won its independence before political power and is currently looking for greater participation in protecting human rights.

Making the Best of it: A Conceptual Reconstruction of Abortion Jurisprudence in the United States and Mexico

This article makes an effort to identify conceptual categories abstracted from the history of abortion case law in the United States, with the ultimate goal of building a conceptual constitutional framework that is more or less detached from the particularities of the legal system that created it. The result is then used to evaluate the unprecedented ruling by the Mexican Supreme Court in 2008 to decriminalize abortion. The study is divided into five sections. Section I asks why women should be allowed to have abortions. The answer to this question justifies the existence of the right to choose, which involves interests, rights, principles and values. Sections II and III consider how the State should regulate abortion procedures by presenting a detailed regulatory scheme born out of various concepts of United States jurisprudence. Section IV offers some general conclusions on American case law. Finally, Section V focuses on the decriminalization of abortion in the Mexico City Criminal Code. It offers an exercise in comparative law that gives a detailed account of the content of the newly reformed statute and its constitutional challenge in the Mexican Supreme Court, analyzing it through the newly constructed looking glass.

Steele vs. Bulova Watch Co. De la aplicación extraterritorial del Lanham Act estaounidense en México y de la marca notoriamente conocida

This article includes two unrelated subjects that in one litigation merged, one of them is the extraterritorial application of a statute, and the second is the Paris Convention principle known as well known mark. In this litigation both of them joined and created an un precedented protection in Mexico of for eign marks. This article analyzes the judgment in which the U. S. Supreme Court held that it is fine incertain cases, to apply the U. S. Lanham Act to acts occurred abroad. On the other hand, it analyzes a judgment in which the Mexican Supreme Court held protection for a foreign non registered trade mark against registration obtained in bad faith by a third party that happened to be the defendant in the U. S. litigation.