Mexico’s Judicial Election: A Morena Success (For Now)…
On June 1, Mexico asked its citizens to directly elect the entire federal judiciary, including nine Supreme Court justices — an unprecedented move anywhere in the world. President Sheinbaum was quick to declare “complete success,” a bold spin on a vote that drew less than 15% of the electorate but strictly from her party’s perspective is likely an accurate statement (for now). Morena-supported judges easily won the elections, and her party’s hold on power (Executive, Congress, Judiciary) is now complete. Presumably this was the plan all along.
The administration tried to frame the results as proof of democratic maturity, noting that more people voted for judges than for the PRI or PAN in the last election. The problem with such comparisons, of course, is that they cut both ways. If the government wants to boast that more people voted for judges than for those parties, it inevitably invites a tougher question: where were the 35 million voters who brought Sheinbaum to power? Mostly at home, confused or uninterested in a highly complex election where 99% of the population reasonably could have no idea who to vote for.
COPARMEX’s stance on the judicial election is clear. What was supposed to be a step toward a stronger, more reliable judiciary, they argue, became just another political power grab dressed as reform. In their view, the process lacked transparency, technical rigor, and any serious evaluation of candidates, turning justice into a popularity contest with almost no voters. For them, this isn’t just about low turnout; it’s about dismantling decades of democratic progress under the pretext of transformation.
Despite all the criticisms inside and outside Mexico, Morena will for now be pleased with the results — a total sweep and no serious checks left on executive power. But as the Chinese like to say, be careful what you wish for. The justice system is now their problem. Any future failures in the courts will land squarely on their shoulders. The party’s hardliners perhaps won’t mind — they’ll gladly take the risk in exchange for tightening their grip on power. But the moderates (including Claudia Sheinbaum) may over time develop buyer’s remorse. With investment scared away by legal uncertainty, the economy moving into a recession, the likely future judicial mess theirs to sort, they may soon ask: was it really worth it? Especially that over time the judiciary could end up favoring the radical wing of Morena, or drug cartels, or vested even corrupt business interests over the more pragmatic voices inside Morena itself.
…And an Old-School Clean Sweep: Morena Takes the Court
According to El Financiero, 54% of voters in the judicial elections backed candidates aligned with the Fourth Transformation. Thus, all nine candidates promoted by Morena in its “cheat sheets” are set to join the new Supreme Court, an old-school clean sweep for the ruling party.
With 87% of polls counted, five women are expected to shape the early composition of Mexico’s new judiciary: Lenia Batres, Yasmín Esquivel, and Loretta Ortiz — all current Supreme Court justices — along with María Estela Ríos and Sara Irene Herrerías. Ríos, former Legal Counsel to the Presidency, is a long-time ally of López Obrador. Herrerías, currently head of the Special Prosecutor’s Office for Human Rights, has focused her career on fighting impunity and gender-based violence.
On the men’s side, Hugo Aguilar led the vote with 5.2%, and is expected to become the Chief Justice (perhaps a surprise). He currently serves as the coordinator for Indigenous rights at the National Institute of Indigenous Peoples (INPI). He was followed by Guiovani Azael Figueroa, human rights coordinator at Ibero-American University in Mexico City, who received 3.0% of the vote. Irving Espinosa, chief magistrate of Mexico City’s Superior Court of Justice and known for his close ties to Claudia Sheinbaum’s legal advisor Ernestina Godoy, garnered 2.87%. Lastly, Arístides Guerrero, at 41 years old, will become the youngest justice on the new Supreme Court.
Starting August 31, 2025, Mexico’s Supreme Court chambers will be officially dissolved, and the constitutional terms of the current justices will come to an end. From June through August 12, both the Full Court and its chambers will only meet on Tuesdays, effectively entering a wind-down phase. A final report summarizing the actions and results of the Chief Justice’s tenure is expected to be published no later than August 15. All of this sets the stage for a complete reset of Mexico’s judicial branch, which is set to begin on September 1.
As for the rest of the results, the National Electoral Institute (INE) has scheduled their release in the following order:
- Wednesday, June 4: Judicial Disciplinary Tribunal magistrates
- Thursday, June 5: Superior Chamber of the Electoral Tribunal magistrates
- Friday, June 6: Regional Chambers of the Electoral Tribunal magistrates
- Sunday, June 8: Circuit court magistrates
- Tuesday, June 10: District court judges
For the new judicial branch to actually function, a fast-track approval of key legislation is essential — which is why an extraordinary legislative session is already in the works. This session is expected to push through critical laws such as the Federal Law of Criminal Procedure, the Law Against Organized Crime, the Amparo Law, the Anti-Money Laundering Law, among others. Without these legal frameworks in place, the newly elected judiciary would be little more than a symbolic reshuffle.
Anatomy of a Controlled Election
For those who did vote, the process felt more guided than spontaneous. Reports and surveys suggest that over 70% of voters used printed “acordeones”—pre-filled lists of recommended candidates—circulated by Morena’s grassroots operatives. Though technically permitted by electoral law, this practice blurred the line between guidance and manipulation. The INE defended it as a legal tool to aid decision-making, (and given it was impossible to know who was who, more or less necessary), but its widespread use gave the impression of a choreographed vote rather than a competitive election.
A similar scene played out in Mexico City, where First Gentleman Jesús María Tarriba was filmed checking his phone—allegedly to view his candidate list—as he prepared to vote. President Sheinbaum dismissed the criticism: “What’s the problem? He had his list—what’s the issue?” She also pushed back against media coverage of the incident, accusing reporters of invading her family’s privacy.
Another red flag was the unusually high number of nullified votes: 22.5% of all ballots cast. With voters expected to select from up to ten ballots containing hundreds of largely unknown names, many appeared overwhelmed. The average time per voter was estimated at 10 to 15 minutes.
Morena’s Rough Night in Veracruz and Durango
In their debut as Morena’s national leadership duo, Luisa María Alcalde and Andrés Manuel López Beltrán hit a hard wall — and not just in Durango, where the PRI’s Esteban Villegas proved his dominance. The real blow came in Veracruz, a supposed Morena stronghold under Governor Rocío Nahle. Despite clinging to the port of Veracruz and entering a legal tug-of-war in Boca del Río, the ruling party lost ground across the state, surrendering 45 municipalities compared to the last local elections.
In Boca del Río, a PAN fortress, Morena tried to spin a tight race as a moral victory. Alcalde claimed, without numbers, that their candidate Bertha Ahued beat PAN’s Maryjose Gamboa. The PAN wasn’t having it. Party leader Jorge Romero fired back, warning Morena not to “win at the table what they couldn’t win at the polls.” It’s a classic move — when in doubt, reach for the litigation folder. But the numbers in Veracruz are stark: the breakup with the PT hurt, handing that party 22 new municipalities, and Movimiento Ciudadano’s surprise leap to 41 — including Poza Rica and Papantla — left Morena looking flat-footed.
Durango wasn’t any kinder. Despite national-level political maneuvering, Morena stumbled to a distant third in the capital race with José Ramón Enríquez, and couldn’t even secure Lerdo, which went to a PAN-PRI alliance. They held on to Gómez Palacio and Santiago Papasquiaro, but the victory in the latter was tainted after their candidate, Karen Pérez, was caught red-handed with unexplained cash.
Making Steel Expensive Again: The Real Cost of Trump’s Trade Play
President Trump’s decision to double tariffs on steel and aluminum imports to 50% rattled global markets again. The announcement, made during a visit to a U.S. Steel plant in Pennsylvania, is part of Trump’s broader protectionist agenda aimed at bolstering domestic industries. However, critics argue that such measures could backfire, leading to increased costs for American consumers and retaliatory actions from trade partners.
The European Commission has already expressed its readiness to respond with countermeasures, highlighting the risk of escalating tensions. Meanwhile, Mexico and Canada, key suppliers of steel and aluminum to the U.S., are bracing for economic impacts. Analysts warn that the tariffs could disrupt supply chains, particularly in sectors like automotive and construction, which rely heavily on these metals.
In the short term, U.S. steelmakers may benefit from reduced foreign competition. However, the long-term consequences could include inflationary pressures and strained international relations. As the global economy grapples with these developments, stakeholders are calling for a more measured approach to trade policy.
President Claudia Sheinbaum announced that she will meet with the Economy Ministry team to review the document in which former U.S. President Donald Trump proposes doubling tariffs. “We’re going to meet to go over it, and then we’ll announce our response measures,” the president stated with now-characteristic caution.
One Offer, Take It or Strike: The Government’s Strategy with CNTE
Despite the federal government’s insistence of a “final offer,” the standoff with the CNTE continues. After 18 days of strikes and fruitless negotiations, the administration of President Claudia Sheinbaum seems to believe that a gradual reduction in the retirement age and a 10% salary increase should finally quell the unrest. However, the CNTE remains steadfast in its demands: the full repeal of the 2007 ISSSTE law, the elimination of the UMA as a basis for pension calculations (Unit of Measure and Update, introduced in 2016 to replace the minimum salary as a means of updating figures for inflation), and the restoration of a solidarity-based pension system. The government’s proposals, including a state supplement to private pensions, are viewed by the union as superficial and inadequate.
By offering incremental changes while maintaining the existing structure, the administration is putting fiscal discipline ahead of placating the radical CNTE. In the meantime, the CNTE continues its mobilization, signaling that the conflict is far from resolved.
Contact:
Laura Camacho
Executive Director Miranda Public Affairs
laura.camacho@miranda-partners.com
Download PDF: MI-PublicAffairsChatter-060325