Background on the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN)
The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) is Mexico’s highest court responsible for interpreting the Constitution and ensuring that all laws comply with it. Its decisions have significant implications for local governments and industries across the country.
The Controversy
In a recent ruling, the SCJN declared invalid several portions of seven municipal revenue laws from Guerrero, Coahuila, San Luis Potosí, and Nayarit. These laws attempted to regulate activities related to hydrocarbons, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), electricity generation, railways, and environmental impact. The SCJN determined that these regulations exceeded the municipal governments’ constitutional competencies, which do not include authorizing the operation of businesses dealing with hydrocarbons.
Key Figures and Arguments
Minister Loretta Ortiz Ahlf presented the SCJN’s project of sentencia, explaining that municipalities lack the authority to authorize businesses involved in hydrocarbon commerce. She highlighted that the impugnated norma granted municipalities the power to conduct technical inspections in establishments selling and distributing combustibles and LPG, which she argued exceeded their constitutional competencies.
Justice Lenia Batres disagreed with Ortiz Ahlf regarding the registration of commercial establishments selling LPG and imposing fines for unauthorized storage of explosive materials like LPG, carburants, and similar substances in properties. Batres pointed out that the Chilpancingo, Guerrero municipality’s policing and good governance ordinance explicitly authorizes the registration of municipal patterns.
Ministers Ortiz Ahlf and Estela Ríos González countered Batres, asserting that neither a policing ordinance nor a regulation could supersede the Constitution. Ríos González emphasized that “a regulation cannot serve as the basis for declaring a secondary norm constitutional.”
Specific Cases Analyzed by the SCJN
Controversia Constitucional 48/2025: The SCJN examined whether municipalities could register commercial establishments selling LPG and impose fines for unauthorized storage of explosive materials.
Controversia Constitucional 102/2025: The SCJN reviewed the Acuña, Coahuila Municipal Revenue Law, which did not explicitly mention charging for authorizations related to hydrocarbon exploitation but implied payments for building operation licenses for structures involved in extracting shale gas, natural gas, and non-associated gas. The law also covered perforation permits for vertical and directional wells in the Roca Reservoir, with fees tied to each extracted unit or well.
Impact and Implications
The SCJN’s decision reinforces the constitutional principle that municipal governments cannot regulate activities falling under federal jurisdiction, such as hydrocarbon exploitation. This ruling will likely influence similar cases across Mexico, ensuring that local governments respect the federal government’s exclusive competencies in these areas.
Key Questions and Answers
- What is the main issue addressed by the SCJN? The SCJN examined whether municipalities could regulate activities related to hydrocarbons, LPG, electricity generation, railways, and environmental impact, which fall under federal jurisdiction.
- What did the SCJN decide? The SCJN declared invalid various provisions of seven municipal revenue laws that exceeded municipal competencies by attempting to regulate activities under federal jurisdiction.
- Who were the key figures in this controversy? Ministers Loretta Ortiz Ahlf, Lenia Batres, and Estela Ríos González played crucial roles in presenting arguments and casting votes.
- What are the implications of this ruling? The decision reinforces that municipal governments cannot regulate activities under federal jurisdiction, ensuring respect for the constitutional principle of exclusive competencies.
