Fact Check: Critics Fear the Election Could Eliminate the Last Major Check on Morena's Power
What We Know
In June 2025, Mexico held a groundbreaking election allowing voters to elect judges at all levels of the judiciary, a move that has been both praised and criticized. Critics, including legal experts and former officials, have raised concerns that this shift could undermine judicial independence and concentrate power in the ruling party, Morena. The election was characterized by a low voter turnout of only 13%, raising questions about its legitimacy and the public's engagement with the judicial process (source-2).
Former president Andrés Manuel López Obrador and his successor Claudia Sheinbaum have championed this reform, claiming it would enhance democracy by making judges accountable to the electorate. However, many critics argue that this could lead to a politicized judiciary, where judges may be influenced by party loyalty rather than impartiality (source-1).
The new judicial structure includes a Tribunal for Judicial Discipline, which has broad powers to investigate judges, potentially enabling the ruling party to remove those who do not align with its interests (source-2). Critics fear this could eliminate the last significant check on Morena’s power, as the party already controls the presidency and Congress (source-3).
Analysis
The claim that the election could eliminate the last major check on Morena's power is supported by multiple sources that highlight the potential consequences of this judicial reform. The transition from an appointment-based system to one where judges are elected is seen as a significant shift that could compromise judicial independence. Critics argue that this reform is a strategic move by Morena to consolidate power, as evidenced by the party's dominance in the recent elections (source-2).
Furthermore, the low voter turnout indicates a lack of public engagement and understanding of the judicial election process, which raises concerns about the legitimacy of the newly elected judges (source-2). Legal experts warn that politicizing the judiciary could lead to a system where judges are beholden to political interests rather than the law, undermining the rule of law and democratic principles (source-1).
The sources used in this analysis are credible, coming from established news outlets and expert commentary. They provide a comprehensive overview of the implications of the judicial elections and reflect a consensus among critics regarding the potential erosion of checks and balances in Mexico's political system.
Conclusion
The claim that critics fear the election could eliminate the last major check on Morena's power is True. The evidence presented indicates that the judicial reforms, while framed as a democratizing measure, may in fact serve to consolidate power within the ruling party, thereby undermining the independence of the judiciary and the system of checks and balances that is essential for a functioning democracy.
Sources
- Will elections for judges make Mexico the ‘most democratic country in the world’? Critics fear the opposite
- In Mexico, Thousands Ran for Office, Few Voted and One ...
- Mexico is removing its last check on executive power
- Mexico's new Supreme Court will likely heavily favor ...
- Mexico's Judicial Election Is a Blow for Democracy
