Mexico's governing Morena party has passed a constitutional reform modifying the judicial election model and introducing new grounds for electoral nullity [1].

The overhaul represents a fundamental shift in the country's legal architecture. By changing how judges are selected and expanding the state's power to void elections, the reform alters the balance of power between the executive and the judiciary.

The reform was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on Sept. 15, 2024 [1]. It subsequently gained the support of more than half of the state legislatures during the latter half of 2024 [2].

Under the new rules, the government may declare electoral nullity based on foreign financing, disinformation, or external propaganda [1]. Morena officials said these measures are intended to perfect the judicial election model and increase electoral control [3].

Opposition figures have reacted with severe criticism. Former President Ernesto Zedillo said, "Our young democracy has been murdered." He said that the changes could transform the democratic system into a tyrannical regime [3].

Other political figures have defended the move. Sen. Miguel Ángel Yunes Márquez (Morena) said, "We defend the vote in favor of the judicial reform because it strengthens the institutionality of the Judicial Power" [4].

The tension highlights a deep divide over the role of the courts. While the governing party views the changes as a necessary modernization of the judiciary, critics see the ability to re-elect magistrates and disqualify electoral results as a tool for political consolidation [3, 5].

“"Our young democracy has been murdered."”

This reform signals a transition toward a more centralized political system in Mexico. By integrating the judiciary into a more political election process and creating broad triggers for electoral nullity, such as 'disinformation,' the government increases its oversight of the legal and electoral outcomes. This reduces the independence of the courts to act as a check on executive power, potentially aligning the judiciary more closely with the governing party's agenda.