Concerns grow over suspicious candidates in Mexico’s 1st judicial election

This Sunday, Mexicans will head to the polls in a historic and controversial election. 

For the first time, voters will choose thousands of judges at all levels — from local courts to the Supreme Court — positions that were previously appointed. 

The reform, passed in 2024 and pushed through in the final months of former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s term, was billed as a bold move to tackle corruption and impunity. President Claudia Sheinbaum has defended it as a way to democratize justice, saying that the system has served only the wealthy and well-connected.

The reform will make Mexico the only country in the world to select every judge by popular vote, and it will completely reshape the country’s judicial branch. 

But critics say the election opens the door to dangerous and unvetted candidates.

In addition, many voters admit that with thousands of candidates competing for 2,500 positions, they don’t even know who’s running or how the vote affects them.

Polling shows that even the most high-profile candidates competing for Supreme Court seats are largely unknown to the public.

Judicial candidates are not allowed to campaign in traditional ways. They can’t buy ads, receive political endorsements or participate in public debates. That’s by design, meant to prevent politicization. 

But that also makes it harder for people to get to know the candidates, according to Miguel Meza, a lawyer and activist with Defensorxs, a civil society group monitoring the election.

“What happens is that people could end up voting at random — or not vote at all,” Meza said.

The election was rushed into law only months ago, which makes informed voting very challenging, Meza added.

‘A popularity contest’

Few democracies in the world elect judges. Research shows that judges under electoral pressure are more likely to cater to public opinion than uphold the law impartially. 

But many Mexicans have long lost faith in the current system.

An estimated 94% of crimes in Mexico go unreported or uninvestigated, according to the country’s National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI). 

The reform forces all of Mexico’s judges — more than 7,000 — to resign and stand for election. By Sunday, about half of the country’s judicial posts will be on the ballot, and the rest will follow in 2027.

The move has faced fierce resistance from within the judiciary. Last year, judges and court workers across the country staged protests that shut down courtrooms for weeks.

Karla Luisa Sánchez, a judge near Mexico City, was among those demanding the judicial reform not pass.

“The reform ended years of judicial careers for many people,” she said. “It risks turning the courts into a popularity contest.”

At first, Sánchez planned to comply with the resignation mandate and leave the public sector. But after she saw the list of people vying for her seat, she reconsidered, and is now running for election. 

“I couldn’t leave my position to someone far less prepared,” Sánchez said, “and realized that now the best way to defend the judicial branch is from within this new system.”

To run, candidates for judges only need a law degree, five years of experience and five letters of recommendation. 

“It’s not enough accreditation for sitting over important courts across the country, where those presiding have careers spanning dozens of years,” Sánchez said. 

Sánchez is among a minority of sitting judges now on the ballot. The majority of them have stepped down in opposition to the reform.

At the Supreme Court level, only three of the current 11 justices are seeking election: Lenia Batres, Loretta Ortiz and Yasmín Esquivel. They have publicly supported the judicial reform.

Sánchez’s story reflects a broader anxiety about who’s seeking power in the courts.

‘Serious red flags’

Meza said that his group has reviewed hundreds of judicial candidates and at least 18 raise serious red flags. 

“Eight of them have ties to organized crime,” Meza said. 

One is a former lawyer for El Chapo Guzmán, a cartel boss imprisoned in the US. Another defended Z-40, one of Mexico’s most-violent cartels.

He said several other candidates are linked to an evangelical church whose leaders are facing criminal charges, including for sexual abuse.

While defending a criminal isn’t illegal, Meza said, these candidacies raise ethical questions and reflect how lax the vetting process has been.

“We risk electing judges who are still working for their clients — or worse, for criminal groups,” he said.

When confronted with these concerns, electoral authorities have said they will investigate after the vote and could potentially disqualify some judges after they’ve been elected.

Meza said that that sets a low bar for the judiciary — and does little to inspire the public’s confidence in the courts.