tradition of Spain and the other in
American institutions. Among American
institutions, the Supreme Court of the
United States has had the most influence
on the shape of the Mexican Supreme
Court of Justice.
The influence of the Supreme Court
of the United States can be seen in
the structure and organization of the
Mexican Court. From a semantic point of
view, only Mexico, Uruguay and Brazil
(Federal Supreme Court) have adopted
the term "Supreme Court" (Suprema
Corte). Other Spanish speaking nations
use the terms corte suprema or tribunal
supremo. Argentina calls its court
the Corte Suprema de Justicia de la
Nación and Peru, Costa Rica, Bolivia,
Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador,
Guatemala and Honduras have named
their highest court the Corte Suprema
de Justicia.
States is a constitutional court that is a
paradigmatic example of a constitutionally
diffused power system of checks and
balances. The Supreme Court of Justice
of Mexico has been moving towards a
semi-centralized constitutional court
model similar to that of the U.S. as
opposed to the centralized power models
in European courts.
While there are similarities between
the two court systems in the U.S. and
Mexico, there are also substantial
differences, including the composition
of the courts, the requirements to be
appointed, the role of the president in
appointing the members of the court and
the leadership of the courts. For example,
in Mexico, the Constitution establishes the
following requirements for justices of the
Court: of Mexican nationality, at least 35
years of age, must be a licensed attorney
with 10 years of practice, of a good
have any criminal convictions that warrant
a prison sentence of more than one year
for crimes such as robbery, fraud, breach
of trust or others that seriously affect his/
her good reputation. Furthermore, it is
required for justices to have served with
efficiency, competence and integrity
in the administration of justice, and
those with no judicial experience must
be distinguished and honorable legal
professionals. In Mexico, the requirement
that one must be an attorney to serve
on the Supreme Court has not always
been a conspicuous one, given that the
Constitution of 1857 did not provide
such requirement (the Constitution of
1917 is currently in effect). In the past,
justices were elected through a popular
vote, and voters based their decision on
the personal attributes of the candidates
for the Supreme Court rather than their
training or academic merits.
Upon concluding their term, Mexi-
can justices, like associate justices in
the U.S., receive a retirement pension;
however, upon conclusion of their term,
Mexican justices are barred from rep-
resenting any causes before the federal
courts, a prohibition that does not exist
in the U.S. Another restriction imposed
in Mexico that is not imposed in the U.S.
is that those individuals who served as
Mexico and the United States
Cavazos & Newton since 2008. He has served in important public
posts in the Mexican public and academic sector including the
appointments by Mexico's President Ernesto Zedillo as Administrative
Under-Secretary of the Health Department and by Mexico's Senate to
serve on the first Mexican Federal Judicial Council (Consejero de la
Judicatura Federal). He has published eight books and written more
than 100 articles on topics such as public administration, education
and law. His most recent book, "The Supreme Court of Justice of the
United States," is one of the first books on the U.S. Supreme Court
written by a native Spanish speaker and published in Spanish.
Torre Metrocorp, Avenida Tecamachalco
No. 14-502
Colonia Lomas de Chapultepec
Mexico City, Mexico C.P. 11010
011 52 55 5093 9700 Phone
011 52 55 5093 9701 Fax
drmelgar@ccn-law.com
www.ccn-law.com