On March 13, 2025, the “Decree amending and repealing several provisions of the Amparo Law, Regulatory of Articles 103 and 107 of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States” (the “Decree”) was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation (“DOF”, by its acronym in Spanish), where several provisions of the Amparo Law were amended. These changes impacted both the wording and content of several articles, as well as their consequent application.
Specifically, the Decree amended two hundred and three (203) provisions, repealing six (6) articles. Among the most relevant modifications made by the Decree are the following:
1. Substitution of “Federal District” with “Mexico City”. In general, the Decree modifies all articles that referred to the “Federal District”, adjusting them to the current denomination of “Mexico City”.
2. Substitution of the minimum salary for the “Measurement Update Unit” (“UMA”, by its acronym in Spanish). All references to minimum wage were replaced with UMAs, in line with the 2016 minimum wage de-indexation policy.
3. Implementation of inclusive language. To promote inclusivity, all articles containing gender-specific language were revised to be neutral and more descriptive.
4. National Code of Civil and Family Procedures as supplementary provisions. Articles 2, 10, and 27 of the Amparo Law were amended to replace the supplementary nature of the Federal Code of Civil Procedures with that of the National Code of Civil and Family Procedures.
5. Transfer of powers to the Judicial Administration Council. The Decree amends Articles 3, 4, 13, 61, 73, and 211 of the Amparo Law, to transfer the powers previously held by the Council of the Federal Judiciary to the new Judicial Administration Council.
6. New grounds of inadmissibility. Section III of Article 61 of the Amparo Law was amended in order to determine that the amparo proceeding is inadmissible against acts issued by the Judicial Administration Council, as well as by the Judicial Discipline Court.
7. Rulings without general effects. A paragraph is added to Article 73 establishing that, in the case of amparo proceedings that resolve the unconstitutionality of general laws, under no circumstances will the rulings issued establish general effects, meaning that only relative effects may be granted (only applicable to the acting party).
8. Repeal of provisions referring to the Chambers of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (“SCJN”, by its acronym in Spanish). In accordance with the elimination of the Chambers of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation as provided in the constitutional reform published in the DOF on September 15, 2024, the Decree amends Articles 40, 43, 56, 73, 83, 104, 216, 217, 219, 223, 225, 226, 231, and 232 of the Amparo Law, eliminating references to the Chambers of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation in relation to the exercise of the power of attraction (writ of certiorari), creation of mandatory jurisprudence, resolution of contradiction of criteria, among others.
9. Reduction of votes for the binding nature of the sentences. Articles 216 and 222 of the Amparo Law were modified, in order to establish that the binding nature of the sentences will be applied as long as it is voted by a majority of 6 justices. This is due to the reduction from 11 to 9 justices of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation in terms of the constitutional reform published in the DOF on September 15, 2024.
10. General declaration of unconstitutionality. The minimum number of votes required for the justices of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation to issue a general declaration of unconstitutionality is reduced to 6, in line with the constitutional reduction of justices from 11 to 9.
11. New rules of jurisprudence. The second paragraph of Article 217 is repealed, thus eliminating the mandatory nature of the jurisprudence for the Chambers of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, due to its elimination. On the other hand, the number of votes necessary for the approval of jurisprudence by mandatory precedents is reduced to 6.
12. Elimination of complaints for contradiction of criteria. Section I of Article 227 is repealed, eliminating the possibility of challenging contradictions between regional plenary sessions or collegiate courts of the same region.
13. Transitory provisions. Until the swearing in of the new justices, scheduled for September 1, 2025, the voting rules will continue to operate in accordance with the provisions prior to the Decree.
Undoubtedly, the changes introduced through the Decree represent a profound transformation in the design, structure, and operation of the amparo proceeding. While some of the modifications stem from regulatory updates or harmonization with previous constitutional reforms (such as the elimination of the Chambers of the Supreme Court or the use of the UMA), others generate a legitimate concern regarding the weakening of constitutional control and the effective protection of fundamental rights.
In particular, the limitation of general effects for rulings regarding general laws, the new ground of inadmissibility against resolutions of the Judicial Administration Council and/or the Court of Judicial Discipline, and the elimination of complaints for contradiction of criteria could result in less jurisprudential uniformity, as well as in a decrease in the effectiveness and efficiency of the amparo trial as an instrument of defense against arbitrary and/or unconstitutional acts. The centralization of powers in administrative bodies and the reduction of the number of votes required to adopt binding criteria also raise questions about the balance between procedural speed and democratic legitimacy of jurisdictional decisions.
In this context, it is essential to carefully observe the implementation of the Decree and its impact in practice. The challenge will be to ensure that the changes not only respond to institutional restructuring but also guarantee effective judicial protection in accordance with constitutional and international human rights standards. Citizen surveillance, the critical work of academia, and the commitment of the Federal Judiciary will be essential to ensure that the amparo trial maintains its vocation as a mechanism for constitutional control and, above all, as a safeguard against the abuse of power.
