Mexico Supreme Court Justice Seeks to Ease Political Tensions, but Obstacles Persist

U.S.|A Way Out of Mexico’s Constitutional Crisis? One Idea for Compromise Emerges.

Bespectacled and soft-spoken, Juan Luis González Alcántara has devoted his life to the law, writing tomes on complex doctrines and teaching at a top law school before rising to become a justice on Mexico’s Supreme Court.

Now he is proposing a last-ditch compromise to ease Mexico’s constitutional crisis over the ruling party’s plan to force aspirants for nearly all judgeships in the country to be elected instead of appointed.

The proposal, which he believes could preserve a degree of judicial independence, is simple: Contenders for the Supreme Court and other top courts would have to stand for election. But thousands of other judges, appointed based on years of training, would remain in their jobs.

There is just one problem: In the current political climate, leaders of Morena, the exceptionally powerful ruling party, which blends a nationalist and leftist approach to policy, are equating just about any form of compromise with surrender.

It is not even clear whether his own fellow justices on the high court can coalesce around a deal, which President Claudia Sheinbaum and her allies could simply refuse to accept. In September, a constitutional amendment restructuring the judiciary was passed into law.

But the justice’s proposal showcases the sharply contrasting views in the country over the judicial overhaul, and its status. Morena views the changes called for in the amendment as a done deal, and a needed move to curb corruption and align the judiciary with the wishes of its voters.