The New Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation: A Turning Point in the Mexican Judicial System

June 1, 2025, marked a significant milestone in Mexico's constitutional history. For the first time, polls opened for citizens to directly elect the members of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN), the country's highest judicial tribunal, as well as the entire national judicial system at both local and federal levels. Consequently, popular elections now determine all branches of the State: Executive, Legislative, and for the first time, the Judiciary. This election day, a product of the constitutional judicial reform approved in 2024, modified the SCJN's composition and sparked extensive debates regarding the suitability of this measure and its potential consequences. This article aims to analyze the key elements of this transformation, addressing the context that fostered it, the SCJN's significance within the Mexican legal framework, its historical composition, and the changes imposed by the reform.

I. The Context of the 2024 Judicial Reform: An Unprecedented Change 

The 2024 judicial reform emerged from a broad public debate concerning the Federal Judiciary. Aspects such as the perceived detachment from citizens, efficiency in justice administration, and the reliability of courts in judicial processes were questioned. 

Arguments in favor of the reform highlighted the necessity of a completely new judicial system aimed at eliminating the flaws that had accumulated over the years. In this manner, the Judicial Reform proposed that the popular election of judges, magistrates, and ministers could serve as a mechanism to reform the Judiciary, making it more transparent and effective in light of the public perception of the previous system's inefficiency. The reform, approved and promulgated in late 2024, was presented as a response to the demand for more accessible justice with greater legitimacy of origin. While this might appear attractive, the cost of its implementation involved sidelining fundamental aspects such as the judicial career path, which aspiring judicial officials previously had to undergo, and simultaneously jeopardizing the most elemental principle of judicial independence. 

II. Importance and Function of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation in Mexico 

The SCJN is the highest tribunal in Mexico's justice system and the supreme interpreter of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States (CPEUM) and international treaties to which the country is a party. Its relevance is manifested through several crucial functions: 

• Defense of the Constitution: The SCJN acts as the guarantor of the constitutional order. Through various control mechanisms, the SCJN seeks to ensure that acts of authority and laws adhere to the fundamental principles and rights enshrined in the CPEUM. 

• Protection of Human Rights: One of the SCJN's fundamental functions is the protection of human rights, established in both the CPEUM and the international treaties to which Mexico is a party. 

• Issuance of Precedent (Jurisprudence): The SCJN engages in interpreting and integrating the national legal framework, thereby issuing criteria that are binding for all judicial authorities throughout the country. 

• Constitutional and Conventional Review: It exercises control over the constitutionality of secondary laws to ensure they are interpreted in accordance with the CPEUM and the international treaties signed by Mexico. 

• Court of Last Resort: At the national level, the SCJN acts as the final judicial instance for resolving disputes. Upon exhausting this instance, access to a new review stage would only be available before international bodies such as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. 

  
  

Its significance is undeniable. The SCJN not only resolves cases but, through its criteria, shapes the interpretation of law, defines the scope of rights, and ultimately influences the daily lives of citizens. The autonomy of its decisions is considered a cornerstone for the separation of powers and for ensuring an effective counterbalance to the other two branches of the Union. 

III. Composition of the Court Prior to the Judicial Reform

Prior to the 2024 reform, the SCJN was composed of eleven ministers operating in two chambers (salas). Their appointment followed a process established in the CPEUM, which sought a balance between the Executive and Legislative branches: 

• Presidential Nomination: The President of the Republic submitted a slate of three candidates to the Senate. 

• Senate Approval: The Senate, following appearances by the nominees, selected the minister to fill the vacancy from that slate, by a vote of two-thirds of its members present. 

• Term of Office: Once appointed, ministers served for fifteen years and could only be removed for serious causes stipulated by law. 

  
  

IV. Composition of the Court According to the 2024 Judicial Reform 

The 2024 judicial reform significantly transformed the structure and selection process of the SCJN. The most relevant changes include: 

• Reduction in the Number of Ministers: The SCJN will now be composed of nine ministers, down from the previous eleven, eliminating the chambers into which the tribunal was divided. 

• Direct Popular Election: The most significant change is the election of ministers (as well as all judges nationwide) by popular vote. The process was established as follows:  

• Candidate Nomination: Candidacies are proposed by the three branches of government: the Executive, the Legislative (Chambers of Deputies and Senators), and the Judiciary itself. 

• Candidate Selection: The National Electoral Institute (INE) is responsible for reviewing profiles to ensure they meet constitutional requirements (nationality, age, academic degree, legal experience, good reputation, etc.) and compiling the lists of candidates. 

• Campaign and Election: Candidates conduct electoral campaigns. Finally, they are elected by direct and secret vote of citizens on federal election day. 

• Term of Office: Ministers elected by popular vote will serve for 12 years and can only be removed in accordance with the chapter on public servant responsibility for serious administrative offenses, acts of corruption, and patrimonial damage to the State. 

• Rotation of the Presidency: The reform also establishes that the President of the SCJN will be the person who obtained the majority of votes in the citizen election and will rotate every 2 years. 

• Start of Functions: The ministers who win the election on June 1, 2025, will begin their functions on September 1, 2025. 

  
  

V. June 2025 Judicial Election 

On June 1, 2025, the first popular election was held to choose not only the ministers who will form the new SCJN but also half of the total members of the judiciary at both local and federal levels; the second half will be elected in 2027. Citizen participation was certified at 13 million citizens who went to the polls to cast their vote, representing only 13% of the nominal voter list. 

The election results determined that only 3 of the 11 current ministers will continue in office, meaning the SCJN's composition will be practically new starting September 2025. 

Conclusion 

The 2024 judicial reform and the popular election of SCJN members on June 1, 2025, represent the most significant transformation in the history of the Mexican Judiciary. This new configuration, with its nine ministers elected by citizen vote, is presented with the promise of a more accessible and transparent justice system. However, it also raises questions about maintaining judicial independence against political and popular pressures, the efficiency of its operation, and the preparation of the designated candidates not only for the SCJN but for all other judicial bodies in the country. 

Only time will tell if this constitutional reform will achieve its objectives of improving access to justice, citizen trust, transparency, and system efficiency, or if, on the contrary, the decision for this radical change was not appropriate, thus making the judicial election a test whose effectiveness and suitability were never proven prior to its implementation. 

---

Follow LexTalk World for more news and updates from International Legal Industry.

---