Mexico's Supreme Court Showdown: Judicial Reform in Limbo

Mexico's Supreme Court narrowly missed invalidating part of a controversial judicial reform mandating judge elections. Seven out of eleven justices supported the rollback, failing to reach the required votes. The reform and the debate over its constitutionality have heightened tensions and highlighted concerns over separation of powers.

In a closely watched decision, Mexico's Supreme Court fell short of the votes needed to invalidate aspects of a contentious judicial reform that necessitates elections for judges. During Tuesday's session, seven of the court's 11 justices voted in favor of rolling back key elements of the reform, missing the crucial eighth vote required for the measure to pass.

Proposed by former President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador and backed by President Claudia Sheinbaum, the reform has sparked significant debate due to its controversial elections-by-popular-vote provision for judges and magistrates. The court's draft ruling further questioned aspects of the reform allowing anonymous work on organized crime cases.

The October approval of a constitutional change by Mexico's lower house, rendering reforms 'unchallengeable,' has raised questions about its impact on the separation of powers. Supreme Court President Norma Pina called the debate 'extremely complex,' stressing its historical significance for Mexico's judicial system.

(With inputs from agencies.)