The legislative hot potato that nobody wanted
Just before saying goodbye with their cups of coffee and their files under their arms, the outgoing ministers of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation did what any person would do when faced with a complicated problem: they passed it on to the next person. And the problem is complex. They delegated to the new integration of the Court the titanic task of reviewing the legality of the decrees signed by former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador to regularize the famous chocolate cars. Yes, that benefit that, in a move worthy of a season finale, AMLO extended until September 2026 just two days before handing over the baton. A little farewell gift, how adorable.
In what was its last session – we imagine that with a mood between nostalgic and “I already want to leave” – the First Chamber of the Court accepted the call of a collegiate court to attract one of the multiple amparos filed by the Mexican Association of Automotive Distributors (AMDA). The goal? Challenge the decrees that the former president began to issue in 2022 and that, let’s be honest, have caused more of a stir than a Bad Bunny concert in the Zócalo.
Sheinbaum comes in with modifications
And if the drama were not enough, this Friday President Claudia Sheinbaum came into action announcing that the decree will have modifications. The reason? In his words, “there have been abuses in this opening that was made.” Basically, the attempt at regularization became a wild west of crooked paperwork and questionable procedures. He promised that the details will be released next week, because suspense can never be lacking in Mexican politics.
The vote in the Court was not exactly unanimous. By four votes to one, the Chamber decided that it was time to put the issue on the table—and, in passing, send it to the new generation of ministers. In their explanation, they made a crucial difference: one thing is the legal import of used vehicles and quite another is the regularization of those that entered the country illegally. In other words, buying a car in Texas and bringing it with all its papers in order is not the same as smuggling it in and then waiting for a government “forgiveness.”
The Court was clear: “The analysis of the case will allow us to confront the alleged need to regularize vehicles of foreign origin, in the face of the existence of legislation that classifies as smuggling the possession of a vehicle of foreign origin without documentation proving its legal stay in the country. country“. Translation: we cannot pretend that nothing is happening when there are laws that clearly say that this is a crime.
And they finished with an argument that sounds like a lawyer in a sarcastic way: “That is, to resolve the tension between the commission of a crime of smuggling and the content of a decree that aims to regularize the condition of the vehicle without going through the procedure provided for its importation, and without observing that the vehicle to be regularized lacks the documentation that would prevent the configuration of the crime of smuggling“. In other words, the previous government tried to break its own rules and now it’s time to see if that is valid or it was simply an act of legislative magic.
Economic and environmental impact: the other round of the debate
But the show doesn’t end there. The Court also highlighted that it is necessary to analyze whether this massive regularization causes disproportionate damage to the national automotive industry. Basically, it is a possible unfair competition, where regular cars—which do pay taxes and comply with rules—end up competing against vehicles that entered through the back door. In addition, there is the small detail that many of these units do not meet the minimum environmental requirements. Because, let’s be clear, a car that crossed the border hidden hardly passed an emissions test.
The only one who voted against the attraction of the case was Minister Loretta Ortiz, who curiously is the only member of the now defunct First Chamber who remains in the Court. Reasons? He did not make them known, but his solitary vote gives an additional touch of drama to this judicial novel.
In summary, the new Court inherits not only a fat file, but a debate that mixes legality, economics, the environment and even national sovereignty. And all because of those chocolate cars that have caused so many headaches. Now it’s time to see if the new ministers manage to resolve this mess or if they will simply continue to push it forward. For now, the country hopes—indeed, demands—a solution that does not feel like just another patch, but rather like a definitive answer.
Did you find this topic interesting? Share this article on your social networks and follow us for more analysis on how judicial decisions impact your daily life. Because being informed is always the best ride.
