The Supreme Court invalidates Puebla's powers over parties and unions

The Plenary of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation invalidated normative portions of the Transparency and Access to Public Information Law of the State of Puebla and the Law for the Protection of Personal Data in Possession of Obligated Entities of the State of Puebla that attributed powers over political parties and unions to the State Electoral Institute and the local Arbitration Tribunal. The resolution, approved by a unanimous vote of nine in the session of March 9, 2026, within Constitutional Controversy 217/2025, is published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on Monday, September 21, 2026 (No. 255/2026, p. 394).

The controversy was promoted by the Federal Executive Power, through the Legal Counsel of the Federal Executive, by means of a written submission presented on September 11, 2025, before the Office of Judicial Certification and Correspondence of the highest court. The challenged norms—article 4, last paragraph, and article 8, fraction V, of the state transparency law, and article 5, fraction II, of the personal data law—had been published in the Official Gazette of the State of Puebla on July 31, 2025. The presentation was handled by Minister María Estela Ríos González, with Secretary Arlín Maribel Pérez Parada.

The federal Executive argued that these provisions duplicated functions reserved for the Federation following the constitutional reform on organic simplification, published on December 20, 2024, and the general laws issued by the Congress of the Union on March 20, 2025. The Congress of the Free and Sovereign State of Puebla and the Governor of the State of Puebla denied the invasion of jurisdiction and alleged that transparency and data protection are matters of concurrent legislative authority.

An invasion of federal competencies

The court concluded that the protection of access to information and personal data of political parties corresponds exclusively to the National Electoral Institute, without distinction between national and local registries, pursuant to article 41, fraction I, last paragraph, of the Constitution. Regarding unions, article 123 of the Constitution reserves those functions for federal labor authorities:

• Federal Center for Conciliation and Labor Registration, for unions under section A.
• Federal Conciliation and Arbitration Tribunal, for those under section B.

Regarding national security, the Court determined that only the Congress of the Union can issue laws on the matter (article 73, fraction XXIX-M), therefore the Puebla legislator could not establish the terms for the reservation of information based on that cause.

What was invalidated

The judgment declared the invalidity of the following normative portions:

• Article 8, fraction V, of the Puebla transparency law: “the State Electoral Institute as far as state-registered political parties are concerned” and “and the Arbitration Tribunal as far as Trade Unions are concerned”.
• Article 4, last paragraph, of the same law: “in accordance with the terms established by this Law”.
• Article 5, fraction II, of the state personal data law: “the State Electoral Institute as far as state-registered political parties are concerned”.

Furthermore, approximately twenty portions of both laws were annulled by extension of effects, including articles 2, 3, 7, 8, 67, 69, 175, and 186 of the transparency law, and articles 2, 3, and 5 of the personal data law, due to their direct dependence on what was invalidated.

Effects and voting

The declaration takes effect upon notification of the resolutive points to the Congress of the Free and Sovereign State of Puebla. Puebla authorities must refrain from applying the invalidated portions and process requests and appeals regarding parties and unions in accordance with the constitutional design and general and federal laws, without recognizing the State Electoral Institute or the local Arbitration Tribunal as competent guaranteeing authorities. The resolution will also be published in the Official Gazette of the State of Puebla and in the Judicial Weekly of the Federation and its Gazette.

The ruling was adopted by a unanimous vote of nine ministers: Herrerías Guerra, Espinosa Betanzo, Ríos González, Esquivel Mossa, Batres Guadarrama, Ortiz Ahlf, Figueroa Mejía, Guerrero García, and President Hugo Aguilar Ortiz. Minister Irving Espinosa Betanzo issued a concurring opinion, in which he warned that the judgment could have reinforced the regularity parameter of the new transparency system to avoid duplication of powers and save budget; Minister Ortiz Ahlf also announced a concurring vote. The certification of the judgment was signed on August 26, 2026.

With this ruling, political parties and trade unions active in Puebla cease to be subject to local bodies regarding transparency and personal data, and information requests addressed to those obligated subjects must be resolved by the National Electoral Institute or by federal labor authorities, as applicable.

Source: Official Gazette of the Federation, No. 255/2026, Monday, September 21, 2026, Judicial Branch, p. 394 (official reference: Constitutional Controversy 217/2025).