Mario López Ayala, PhD
June 1, 2025, will not be just another Sunday in contemporary Mexican history. It may mark the beginning of a deep transformation—not only of the judicial system—but of the very balance of Mexican democracy. For the first time in history, the people are being called to directly elect judges, magistrates, and even justices of the Supreme Court. A decision so disruptive that it challenges the Mexican judicial model and shakes the constitutional foundations of Latin America.
The Fourth Transformation, led by outgoing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador and now continued by President-elect Claudia Sheinbaum, has framed this reform as an act of popular justice: the people command, the people cleanse, the people judge. But when the ballot box replaces merit, experience, and impartiality with popularity, state populism walks boldly into the halls of justice.
A Blindfolded Scale No More
In the name of an anti-corruption crusade—legitimate, yet dangerously absolutist—the ruling party has placed dozens of candidates on the ballot who lack judicial experience, professional ethics, and in some cases, have alarming ties to organized crime. According to The Washington Post (2025), some candidates include former defense attorneys of Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, in regions where drug cartels wield more power than the state (Washington Post, 2025a).
Judicial independence—the very principle that prevents power from devouring itself—is now in intensive care. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has sounded the alarm. So has Human Rights Watch (2024), warning that the proposed constitutional changes threaten due process guarantees and judicial autonomy.
A Geopolitical Fault Line
This is no local issue. In a world where democracies wobble, what happens in Mexico will be scrutinized closely by Washington, Brussels, and Beijing. Foreign investment does not land where legal uncertainty reigns. Business cannot thrive where litigation is resolved in TikTok clips instead of impartial courts. Capital flees chaos. We’ve seen it in Venezuela, in Nicaragua, and—on a smaller scale—in Bolivia.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) recently warned that this reform could “severely undermine Mexico’s economic appeal in the global nearshoring landscape,” undermining legal certainty and investor confidence (CSIS, 2025).
Reform or Regression?
Supporters of the reform argue that the people have the right to decide over all branches of power. And they’re right. But democracy is not limited to voting. It’s also checks and balances, legality, procedural guarantees, and yes—professionals who do not depend on applause or polls to uphold the law.
Electing judges is not a progressive innovation; it’s a recycled idea that, in other contexts, has yielded more darkness than light. In the United States, where some judges are elected, political pressure and campaign financing have already tainted judicial neutrality. And even so, their legal culture and institutional safeguards are light-years ahead of ours.
In Mexico—where elections are already plagued by clientelism, organized crime, and violence—trusting the integrity of the judiciary to the popular vote is not democratizing justice: it’s blowing it up from within.
What Now?
Tomorrow, millions of Mexicans will go to the polls without knowing who the candidates for the judiciary are, without understanding their backgrounds, their ties, or their platforms. Because none exist. There is only propaganda, party logos, colors… and simulation. The judicial robe has become a campaign jersey.
History will judge this moment. But the verdict won’t be immediate. It will come in the form of purchased rulings, inexplicable acquittals, and impunity masquerading as popular sovereignty.
Mexico did not need a blind reform. It needed a judicial system reformed from within: autonomous, professional, shielded from political power and criminal influence. What we are witnessing today is something else entirely. It is the last institutional bastion of the republic under siege by the electoral machine.
And when justice ceases to be a branch of the State and becomes an electoral spoil, the nation crosses a dangerous line—the one that separates the rule of law from the law of the jungle. There is no democracy where judges seek votes instead of delivering justice. There is no republic where judicial robes are laundered in the voting booth. What today may seem like an act of popular sovereignty, tomorrow may be the perfect alibi for authoritarianism. Because when power puts on the mask of “the people” and hands populism the keys to the Supreme Court, justice doesn’t just die… it becomes complicit.
References:
- CSIS. (2025, June 6). Justice on the Ballot? The Impact of Mexico’s Judicial Reform on the Rule of Law and Business Environment. Center for Strategic and International Studies. https://www.csis.org/events/justice-ballot-impact-mexicos-judicial-reform-rule-law-and-business-environment
- El País. (2025, May 31). Morena apuesta su capital político a la reforma judicial. https://elpais.com/mexico/2025-05-31/morena-apuesta-su-capital-politico-a-la-reforma-judicial.html
- Human Rights Watch. (2024, August 30). Mexico: Proposed Constitutional Changes Threaten Rights. https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/08/30/mexico-proposed-constitutional-changes-threaten-rights
- Washington Post. (2025a, May 12). This lawyer was counsel to El Chapo — and could soon be one of Mexico’s judges. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/05/12/mexico-judicial-election-narco-ties
- Washington Post. (2025b, May 30). Mexico is removing its last check on executive power. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/05/30/mexico-judicial-independence-democracy-authoritarianism