Politics: A preliminary assessment of the new Mexican Supreme Court’s performance so far
The new Mexican Supreme Court (SCJN), operational for nearly eight months, has already issued two highly controversial rulings that have generated widespread distrust and concern. The first authorizes the Financial Intelligence Unit (UIF) to freeze bank accounts of individuals and companies without a court order, based solely on suspicions of money laundering. This decision reverses the Court’s own 2018 precedent, significantly expands the UIF’s discretionary powers, and effectively weakens constitutional protections under Articles 14 and 20, including due process and the presumption of innocence. Critics argue that the ruling reflects political rather than legal criteria and reveals a concerning lack of constitutional expertise among several ministers.
The second ruling upholds a cap on rent increases in Mexico City, limiting them to the annual inflation rate reported by INEGI. While supporters view it as a legitimate measure to protect the right to adequate housing and prevent gentrification, opponents warn that it distorts market signals, discourages investment in the real estate sector, and echoes failed rent-control policies of the past that led to urban deterioration.
These decisions have reinforced perceptions that the new SCJN, elected in June 2025, is heavily aligned with the current government and Morena. With only a few ministers possessing solid constitutional law credentials, the Court struggles to project impartiality and legal reliability. This politicization, combined with questionable internal decisions and limited legal preparation among some members, is becoming a significant obstacle to private investment and legal certainty during the current administration.
In its first eight months, the Court has seen its credibility gradually deteriorate, raising serious doubts about its role as an independent constitutional arbiter.
Now read on...
Register to sample a report