SCJN annuls article of the Jalisco Constitution regarding transparency

The Plenary Court of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) declared Constitutional Controversy 271/2025, promoted by the Federation against the Legislative and Executive Powers of the State of Jalisco, to be admissible and well-founded, and annulled a portion of Article 9 of the local Constitution regarding transparency. The ruling, issued in the session of May 25, 2026, was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on Thursday, August 20, 2026, within the Judicial Power section.

The ruling invalidated the portion of Article 9, fifth paragraph, of the Political Constitution of the State of Jalisco, reformed by Decree 29842/LXIV/25, published on October 16, 2025, in the Official Gazette of the entity. The challenged norm established that the Electoral and Citizen Participation Institute of the State of Jalisco and the Arbitration and Merit Ranking Tribunal of the State would serve as guaranteeing authorities in matters of transparency and protection of personal data regarding political parties and unions, respectively.

The jurisdictional conflict

The Federation argued that the precept invaded its jurisdictional sphere by creating a duplication of functions in access to public information and the protection of personal data. According to the lawsuit, Articles 6, 41, 73, 123, and 124 of the Federal Constitution reserve such protection for federal authorities: the National Electoral Institute (INE) for political parties, and the Federal Center for Conciliation and Labor Registration and the Federal Conciliation and Arbitration Tribunal for unions.

The Plenary recalled that the constitutional reform on organic simplification, published on December 20, 2024, extinguished the INAI and reassigned its powers, concentrating the transparency oversight of parties in the INE and that of unions in federal labor bodies. Although the Fourth Transitory Article of that reform ordered local legislatures to harmonize their legal framework, the Court concluded that such harmonization does not allow for the creation of guaranteeing authorities where the Federation reserved exclusive jurisdiction.

The decision and its effects

The sentence declared the invalidity of the normative portion that designated local bodies as guarantors and, by extension, that of Article 9, sixth paragraph, in the portion “union, political party.” The declaration will take effect upon notification of the resolutive points to the Congress of the State of Jalisco.

• Merits: approved unanimously by nine votes.
• Effects: approved unanimously; the invalidity by extension of the sixth paragraph, by a majority of eight votes.
• Abstention: by a majority of six votes, the Plenary decided not to extend the invalidity to secondary regulations, considering that Jalisco is in the process of legislative harmonization, and exhorted the local Congress to complete it.

The resolution was presented by Minister Giovanni Azael Figueroa Mejía, with the secretariat of Omar Cruz Camacho. A Dissenting Opinion was issued by Minister María Estela Ríos González and a Concurring Opinion by Minister Irving Espinosa Betanzo, who considered that the invalidity should have been extended to local secondary laws. The ruling was ordered to be published in the Official Gazette of the Federation, the Official Gazette of the State of Jalisco, and the Judicial Weekly of the Federation.

Relevance for readers

The judgment sets a precedent regarding the limits of state autonomy versus exclusive federal competence in matters of transparency, following the organic simplification reform. Consequently, political parties and unions in Jalisco are subject to the oversight of federal authorities, and the local Congress must adjust its legislation to the criteria of the ruling, in a matter of national legal interest.

Source: Official Gazette of the Federation, No. 227/2026, Thursday, August 20, 2026, Judicial Branch, p. 135 (official reference: Constitutional Controversy 271/2025).