Mexico is no stranger to political drama, but the past week has delivered a double dose of turbulence that has left the nation’s institutions under intense public scrutiny. On August 27, 2025, the Mexican senate erupted into chaos as a heated debate spiraled into a physical altercation between two of the country’s most prominent political figures. Just days later, Mexicans are bracing for another historic moment: the swearing-in of a new Supreme Court, whose legitimacy is already being questioned due to concerns about judicial independence and the ruling Morena party’s growing influence.
The senate incident, captured in a livestreamed video and widely reported by Reuters, unfolded as lawmakers gathered to close the day’s session. Alejandro “Alito” Moreno, head of the opposition Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), approached senate president Gerardo Fernandez Norona, a leading figure in the Morena party, demanding to be heard. “I’m asking you to let me speak,” Moreno insisted, grabbing Fernandez Norona by the arm. Tensions escalated quickly. “Don’t touch me,” Fernandez Norona shot back, but the confrontation only intensified. What began as a verbal spat soon devolved into pushing, shoving, and a cascade of punches, with Moreno knocking over a photographer in the melee. Another lawmaker even joined in, swinging at Fernandez Norona as he attempted to retreat.
According to Fernandez Norona, the altercation was more than a mere scuffle. He recounted, “(Moreno) started pulling on me, touching me, pushing. He hit me and said, ‘I’m going to beat the shit out of you, I’m going to kill you’.” Moreno, for his part, claimed that Fernandez Norona had swung at him first, a point of contention that has only deepened the partisan divide. The fight broke out after what Fernandez Norona described as a “difficult debate” over the presence of armed forces from other countries in Mexico—a topic that has become increasingly contentious as the nation grapples with issues of security, sovereignty, and the militarization of civilian life.
The fallout was swift. Fernandez Norona announced plans to convene an emergency session on August 29, 2025, during which he intends to propose the expulsion of Moreno and three other PRI lawmakers involved in the brawl. The spectacle has fueled public concern over the tenor of political discourse in Mexico and cast a shadow over the legislative branch at a moment when the country’s judiciary is also facing a crisis of confidence.
That crisis centers on Mexico’s new Supreme Court, set to take office on September 1, 2025. For the first time in the nation’s history, all nine justices were elected by popular vote in a watershed election held on June 1, 2025. The scale of the reform was unprecedented: voters also chose 1,800 local and 881 federal judicial positions, along with members of a newly created disciplinary court. Yet, the process was marred by irregularities and a strikingly low turnout—only 13% of eligible voters participated, according to reporting by the Daily Maverick and other outlets.
Critics have accused the ruling Morena party of orchestrating the outcome. During the campaign, Morena distributed so-called “cheat sheets” listing its preferred Supreme Court candidates. Unsurprisingly, all nine justices who emerged victorious were those endorsed by the party. The terms for these new justices are staggered: four will serve until 2033, another four until 2036, and one until 2039—ensuring that the court’s makeup will shape Mexican jurisprudence for years to come.
The new Supreme Court president, Hugo Aguilar, is no stranger to Morena or its leadership. He previously served at the National Institute for Indigenous People under former President and Morena founder Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), and his negotiations were pivotal to the completion of the Maya Train, one of AMLO’s signature projects. Since his election, Aguilar has been seen appearing publicly with Morena lawmakers and echoing party rhetoric. Another incoming justice, María Estela Ríos, campaigned as “AMLO’s lawyer,” having served as his legal counsel both during his presidency and earlier as mayor of Mexico City.
Continuity is further ensured by the three sitting justices who remain on the court—all with close ties to Morena. Lenia Batres, for instance, belongs to a powerful political family within the ruling coalition, while Yasmín Esquivel and Loretta Ortiz were both appointed by López Obrador and have longstanding connections to his inner circle. Their family ties to government contractors and political advisers raise additional questions about impartiality.
The court’s first months will be a baptism by fire, as it faces three high-profile cases with the potential to reshape Mexico’s legal landscape. First up is a tax dispute involving business magnate Ricardo Salinas Pliego, whose companies allegedly owe hundreds of millions of pesos to the country’s tax authorities. Salinas denies any wrongdoing, but the case is seen as a test of the court’s willingness to challenge powerful interests and uphold the government’s anti-elitist rhetoric. A tough ruling could bolster Morena’s redistributive agenda, but the legal reasoning and severity of penalties will be closely scrutinized.
Perhaps even more contentious is the question of pre-trial detention. In 2023, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights ordered Mexico to eliminate the practice of “automatic preventive prison,” which allows authorities to incarcerate thousands without due process or conviction. The Supreme Court will now have to decide whether—and how—to comply. This issue is fraught with political and social implications: pre-trial detention disproportionately affects the poor, yet Morena has expanded its use, arguing it is necessary to combat organized crime. President Claudia Sheinbaum has made public safety a top priority and even urged outgoing justices to leave the matter for the newly elected court, signaling her confidence in a favorable outcome.
The third major challenge relates to the militarization of civilian life. The previous court, particularly the pro-Morena bloc, consistently supported expanding the military’s role in government operations and the economy. The new court will be asked to rule on cases concerning the transfer of powers and funds to the armed forces, a move that has sparked debate over the erosion of civilian oversight and the risk of authoritarianism.
Meanwhile, the newly created disciplinary court—intended to root out corruption and undue influence—faces skepticism. While its mandate is to provide oversight, analysts warn it could become a tool to pressure judges into aligning with ruling party interests, further undermining judicial independence. Local and federal courts, whose judges were also elected in June, remain plagued by inefficiency and politicization. Any improvement in the delivery of everyday justice will be welcomed, but meaningful depoliticization seems unlikely in the current climate.
As Mexico’s new Supreme Court prepares to convene and the senate reels from its latest scandal, the country stands at a crossroads. The coming months will reveal whether its institutions can deliver the justice and stability citizens crave—or whether political maneuvering will continue to dominate the national stage.
