MEXICO Trends and Developments Contributed by: Fernando García Gómez, Francisco de Rosenzweig, Yuriria Galicia and Diego Mora-Jensen, White & Case, S.C.
provided the judge justified the need to grant the suspension. • Prohibition on general-effect injunctions: Article 148 now expressly forbids the granting of injunc- tions that may benefit individuals other than the claimant. These provisions removed judicial discretion to bal- ance public and private interests, representing a regression in constitutional protection and rendering amparo a less effective instrument against arbitrary governmental measures. The 2025 legislative initiative: consolidating and expanding restrictions On 17 September 2025, President Claudia Sheinbaum submitted a comprehensive bill to the Senate to amend the Amparo Law, the Federal Fiscal Code and the Organic Law of the Federal Administrative Justice Tri- bunal. The initiative purported to modernise proceed- ings through digitalisation, yet simultaneously codified additional procedural and substantive constraints. • Digitalisation and electronic procedures – the bill introduces mandatory electronic filing, notification and case management via the Judiciary’s Online Services Portal. Authorities must register digital accounts and use electronic signatures. Written filings remain permissible for citizens, ensuring access to justice for those lacking digital means. • Legitimate interest – the bill formalises the concept of legitimate interest, requiring a real and differen- tiated legal injury, the annulment of which would provide a specific benefit. This statutory rigidity removes the interpretive flexibility that previously allowed courts to expand standing, for instance, in environmental or collective rights cases. • Suspension of acts – the reform adds new sce- narios to the list in Article 129 of the Amparo Law to include specific exceptions where suspension is impermissible, such as acts related to illicit resources, the financial system or public debt, and to avoid the continuation of public services where the licence held by an individual or entity has expired or is being revoked. • Indirect amparo and tax matters – indirect amparo proceedings are restricted against tax enforcement acts, except after publication of an auction notice.
In such cases, taxpayers may guarantee fiscal interest only through deposit certificates or letters of credit, limiting alternative forms of guarantee. • Additional procedural amendments – the bill pro- poses: (a) clearer rules for the recusal of judges; (b) additional regulation of claim expansion; (c) deadlines for courts to issue judgments after holding the constitutional hearing; (d) rules for holding public hearings; and (e) stronger sanctions for non-compliance with amparo judgments, including a mandatory reporting obligation to the Federal Prosecutor’s Office when offences arise. • Transitional provisions – the decree would enter into force the day after publication, and pending cases would immediately follow the new regime. The Senate included and approved a transitory article that allows retroactive application of the reform. Such transi- tory provision was not included in the original bill pro- posed by President Sheinbaum and, if approved, would jeopardise the validity and continued effect of stays that citizens have already obtained from the judiciary. At the time of writing this article, the Chamber of Deputies is assessing the bill approved by the Sen- ate and the President, and certain congresspersons have publicly stated that they would vote to remove this transitory provision. Constitutional implications The combined effect of the 2024 and 2025 amend- ments is to narrow judicial discretion and restrict access to constitutional remedies. Judges can no longer issue general-effect rulings even when neces- sary to safeguard collective rights, nor can they freely suspend acts deemed to involve public interest. A recent precedent from the Supreme Court of Justice exemplifies the trend. The Supreme Court will resolve a criteria contradiction (217/2021) among certain tri- bunals concerning environmental amparo, which pro- poses that a legal entity cannot establish legitimate interest solely by its articles of incorporation stating environmental protection as its purpose. Instead, claimants must demonstrate a concrete affectation within a defined area of influence. While the decision
724 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook