Mexico’s first-ever nationwide judicial election has triggered fierce debate as Morena’s dominance, minimal voter turnout, and potential political meddling raise urgent concerns for the future of democratic checks.
At a Glance
- Mexico held its first-ever universal judicial elections on June 1, 2025.
- Voter turnout was just about 13 percent—far below typical federal elections.
- The Morena party’s endorsed candidates swept all nine Supreme Court seats.
- Observers warned that the complex process and “cheat-sheet” voting methods may politicize the courts.
- Indigenous lawyer Hugo Aguilar was elected to the Supreme Court, marking historic representation amid concerns of partisan alignment.
A Radically New System
On June 1, millions of Mexicans voted to elect more than 2,600 judicial positions—from district judges to Supreme Court justices—in what is believed to be the world’s first universal judicial election. The reform, championed by former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador and carried forward by President Claudia Sheinbaum, sought to transition from appointments to popular elections to tackle perceived corruption. However, the low turnout and bewildering ballots—a result of six separate ballots and hundreds of names—left many Mexicans disengaged.
As tallies came in, virtually all Supreme Court seats were claimed by candidates with overt Morena support, sparking alarm that the party now exerts influence across all three branches of government, according to vote tallies reported by Politico. Among them, Hugo Aguilar Ortiz—a Mixtec lawyer—earned the highest vote total, signifying both an Indigenous breakthrough and deep ties to Morena through previous government projects.
Watch a report: Mexico’s judicial elections see just 13% turnout despite overhaul.
Democracy vs. Capture
International observers, including the Organization of American States, sharply criticized the election. They cited voter confusion, lack of transparency, and the widespread usage of “cheat sheets” that effectively guided voters toward government-endorsed candidates. The OAS warned against replicating such a model, citing risks to judicial independence. U.S. and Canadian officials echoed these concerns, linking them to broader economic and democratic stability.
President Sheinbaum hailed the exercise as a “complete success”, asserting it would root out corruption and make Mexico “the most democratic country in the world.” Yet opposition parties, including PAN and PRI, decried the process as a sham, accusing the government of manipulating turnout and enabling organized crime to infiltrate the courts.
High Representation, High Stakes
The election of Aguilar represents a milestone for Indigenous inclusion, offering hope to Mexico’s 23 million–strong Indigenous population. However, critics note his close association with Morena-led infrastructure initiatives—especially the Maya Train—and question whether judicial rulings will remain impartial. Analysts also point to broader trends in Latin America, citing cases in Guatemala and Peru where politicized judiciaries have eroded democratic norms.
With another wave of judicial elections scheduled for 2027, the stakes are growing. Civil society groups and international watchdogs are calling for structural safeguards—independent vetting, transparency requirements, and judicial training—to counterbalance political influence and ensure public trust.
As Mexico embarks on a grand judicial experiment, it stands at a decisive moment: will this democratic gamble foster a more accountable judiciary, or will it usher in a system captured by partisan forces and unchecked power?
