Background on the Case and Key Parties Involved
The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) unanimously confirmed a child support sentence against a delinquent parent, obliging them to pay alimony to their two minor daughters. This decision came while addressing another case regarding access to pension benefits for relatives under the IMSS regulations.
The Pension Access Restriction Issue
In the case of amparo directo en revisión 3320/2025, the SCJN declared an article from the IMSS Retirement and Pension Regulations as unconstitutional. This article restricted pension access for relatives (such as aunts) to only parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents.
The Facts of the Case
A woman, who was an aunt to a deceased IMSS worker, sought a pension for relatives as she had raised him and lived with him for over four decades, becoming financially dependent in recent years. The IMSS denied her request because she did not meet the criteria of a relative under their retirement and pension regulations.
SCJN’s Ruling on Child Support
In another case (amparo directo en revisión 3097/2025), the SCJN, under the leadership of Loretta Ortiz Ahlf, reviewed whether abandoning alimony obligations (as per Article 295 of the Tamaulipas Criminal Code) violated Article 14 of the Federal Constitution.
Key Points from the SCJN’s Decision
- Confirmation of the Sentence: The SCJN unanimously upheld the original sentence against the delinquent parent for child support.
- No Constitutional Violation: The Court determined that the abandonment of alimony obligations did not violate Article 14 of the Federal Constitution.
- Judicial Evaluation: The SCJN clarified that judges must evaluate each case individually based on its specific circumstances, and it’s not necessary to list justifications for failing to meet alimony obligations in the penal code.
- No Exhaustive Listing Required: The Court decided that it’s not mandatory to include a comprehensive list of justifications for failing alimony obligations in the penal code, as this would impose an excessive burden on lawmakers.
Impact and Significance of the SCJN’s Decision
This ruling by the SCJN sets a precedent for recognizing family relationships and ensuring that child support obligations are upheld. The decision also clarifies the judicial evaluation process for determining whether failing to meet alimony obligations is justified, preventing an exhaustive list of exceptions in the penal code.
Key Questions and Answers
- What was the main case about? The primary case involved upholding a child support sentence against a delinquent parent while also addressing the constitutionality of restricting pension access for relatives under IMSS regulations.
- Who were the key parties involved? The case primarily concerned an aunt seeking a pension for her nepiece after raising and financially supporting him for many years. The delinquent parent in the child support case was also a key party.
- What did the SCJN decide regarding pension access for relatives? The SCJN declared an article from the IMSS Retirement and Pension Regulations unconstitutional, as it restricted pension access for relatives to only parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents.
- How did the SCJN rule on child support obligations? The SCJN unanimously confirmed the original child support sentence against the delinquent parent and determined that abandoning alimony obligations did not violate Article 14 of the Federal Constitution.
