The Mexican government’s relationship with the United States Embassy in Mexico is “on pause,” President Andrés Manuel López Obrador said Tuesday, five days after U.S. Ambassador Ken Salazar voiced concerns about his proposed judicial reform.
López Obrador also told reporters at his morning press conference that the government was pausing ties with the Canadian Embassy in light of the Canadian ambassador’s remarks about the same proposal.
“How are we going to allow [Salazar] to opine that what we’re doing is wrong,” he said.
“We’re not going to tell him to leave the country, we’re not doing that, but we do have to read the constitution, which is like reading him the riot act,” López Obrador said.
He said that the government’s relationship with Salazar is “good, but on pause,” explaining that the suspension began immediately after the ambassador spoke out against his judicial reform proposal, which could be passed by Congress as soon as next month.
López Obrador — who would like to see the proposal passed before he leaves office on Oct. 1 — also said that Mexico’s relationship with the U.S. Embassy in Mexico is on pause, but the broader bilateral relation “continues.”
Nevertheless, he made it clear that he believes that Salazar was speaking on behalf of the U.S. government, not just himself, when he released his statement on the judicial reform last Thursday. López Obrador also asserted that the United States and Canada acted in concert.
In his statement last Thursday, Salazar said he believed that the “popular direct election of judges is a major risk to the functioning of Mexico’s democracy.”
“… I also think the debate over the direct election of judges … as well as the fierce politics if the elections for judges in 2025 and 2027 were to be approved, will threaten the historic trade relationship we have built, which relies on investors’ confidence in Mexico’s legal framework,” the ambassador added.
“Direct elections would also make it easier for cartels and other bad actors to take advantage of politically motivated and inexperienced judges,” Salazar said.
For his part Canadian Ambassador Graeme Clarke said in an interview published late last week that Canadian investors were concerned about the judicial reform proposal.
López Obrador announced last Friday that the government was sending diplomatic notes to both the United States and Canada in light of the ambassadors’ remarks.
Salazar subsequently said that “the concerns” he expressed about the direct election of judges were made in the “spirit of collaboration.”
He also said he was willing to engage in dialogue with Mexico’s leaders.
On Monday, López Obrador said that he and the U.S. ambassador — a semi-regular visitor to the National Palace — were going to give each other some “time” before reconvening.
The president claimed that the government of Canada acted in an “embarrassing” way by joining the United States’ protest against the judicial reform proposal.
“It looks like an associate state, [they acted] together,” he said.
“They wanted to interfere in matters that only correspond to Mexicans,” López Obrador added.
He said that the pause in the relationships with both the United States and Canadian embassies would continue until representatives of the two countries learned to respect the sovereignty of Mexico — which Salazar has stressed he does, including in an X post early Tuesday afternoon.
“We’re not going to give them advice nor say that this is good or this is bad,” López Obrador said, even though he has been critical of the U.S. government and Congress for not approving greater funding for regional development programs that could help reduce migration, and of the U.S. embargo against Cuba.
“We want them to be respectful — for there to be a reciprocal relationship with regard for respect for sovereignty,” the president said.
Opponents of the judicial reform proposal say that the direct election of judges from candidates nominated by the sitting president, the Congress and the judiciary itself threatens the independence of Mexico’s justice system. Judicial elections, in some cases, would coincide with political elections, a situation that critics believe could lead to politicization of the judiciary.
If the proposal is approved, all 11 justices of the Supreme Court — which has handed down rulings against the current government’s policies and projects — could be replaced next year.
If a majority of justices sympathetic to the agenda of incoming president Claudia Sheinbaum are elected to the Supreme Court, Sheinbaum’s capacity to enact — and maintain — policies that face legal challenges could be enhanced.
Approval of the judicial reform proposal is likely given that the ruling Morena party and its allies will have a supermajority in the lower house of Congress and a strong majority in the Senate.
The last straw?
Beyond Salazar’s statement about the proposed judicial reform, López Obrador has been irked by the United States’ funding of organizations he regards as opponents of his government.
Earlier this month, he once again railed against the United States government’s funding — via the U.S. Embassy in Mexico — of Mexicans Against Corruption and Impunity, an anti-graft group that has exposed alleged corruption in his administration.
“It’s outrageous … that a government that is a friend, a neighbor, is financing a group that opposes a legal, legitimate government. What’s that called? Interventionism,” López Obrador said Aug. 14 after announcing that he would send a letter to U.S. President Joe Biden to complain about the issue.
In light of Salazar’s remarks, the president reiterated that the federal government doesn’t accept “interference” in Mexico’s internal affairs.
“We don’t accept any representative of foreign governments intervening in matters that are solely up to us to resolve,” he said.
The Mexican government has also been less than satisfied with the information the U.S. government has provided about the arrests of alleged Sinaloa Cartel leaders Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada and Joaquín Guzmán López in New Mexico last month.
The Federal Attorney General’s Office said earlier this month that the United States Department of Justice had not provided a range of information it requested about the case.
Mexico News Daily
well gosh . . . from the article ” . . . AMLO made it clear that he believes that Salazar was speaking on behalf of the U.S. government . . . ” that’s the O’Biden / Harris administration!
So perhaps a second President Trump admin is more to their liking . . . ???
I bet it will be. Speak with the locals before you start assuming.
Salazar is just offering his view free speech guessing AMLO doesn’t allow that anymore. Supreme Court judges should not be elected by citizens. AMLO is a confirmed Socialist his best friend Maduro is as corrupt as they come .Just wait till Tump gets elected Mexico will become a better Place
Guts ss you haven’t read the Mexican constitution, I think Mexico is with in its rights to do what it wants. If you don’t like it maybe leave the country. Democracy is what US policy doesn’t like when another country does something they don’t like. Why is there only two parties to choose from in the US elections? A Real democracy would make it easy for people and political parties to run in elections. Right or wrong America?
When you vote for President in the USA, there are actually about 12-15 people to choose from in most years. Of course, only of one the 2 parties will win!
AMLI is not shy about weighing in on US issues. Hhe is very sensitive to criticism and wants absolute power, the hallmark of a tyrant. Thank goodness Mexico allows inly one 6 year term. This man is in a downward spiral. Foreign investors are wise to be cautious. Claudia will be a breath of fresh air, I hope.
It’s a classic case of being unable to see the wood for the trees or chopping off your nose to spite your face ; the advice and concerns are genuine, it’s absolutely possible in Mexico that elected judiciary would be bought by cartels and the law of contract etc discarded with obviously dire consequences for investment, employment, tax income and the potential for friend-shoring. Alternatively, AMLO has the emotional development of a 4 year old. . .
Part I don’t get is isn’t there court system already corrupt? All the naysayers seem to forget that part. So let’s just keep the existing corrupt system? Or test out a new solution where maybe the most famously corrupt judges will be judged themselves by the people? Idk the best solution but definitely keeping things the same level of corrupt is lazy because there are wealthy people who are scared of this change? Their just scared of a change in the legal system that might no longer benefit them.
Hmmmm, it seems that one of the players in this drama is a little thin-skinned, no?
The US and Canada only want an improving and consistent relationship. The more the 3 governments and people are on the same page, the better it will be for all three of us. We have a NAFTA to increase our strength for trade in the world. US and Canada can see that this is a big mistake and we will all suffer from a bad policy change. You want to see things go to crap in a hurry, Elect a Judge and see how many good ones get shot during the campaign process. Only the dirty ones will make it to the
The US is protecting their corporations -not even their people-, which is the hallmark of what is wrong. One just has to see how the financial standing of US middle class has diminished. The exodus of people -living now in different Latin-American countries- is one of the examples of the consequences of US policies.
The mexican government is putting people first -not corporations-, US puts corporations first. While past corruption benefited US ‘business’ they were fine. Now, the reform will benefit Mexico, but might stop advantages to global corporations -like Monsanto, telecommunications, etc.- then, they claimed corruption.
It is obvious that US interventionism is not new -Chile, Argentina, Guatemala, NIcaragua, can tell terrifying stories of interventionism.- Bravo for the current mexican government that said NO MORE.
Thank you for this enligtened point of view. You are absolutely correct about the US constantly intervening in the business of many other countries since the American Revolution, especially Mexico. We cannot for the whole context of the Mexican-American War. Mexico had not and AMLO and Sheinbaum have not either and they will protect Mexico’s sovereign rights.
Some believe the people are too dumb to elect judges in Mexico,… but wait I believe that’s the way it is done in the USA? I guess dumb people in the USA should change their laws and let the politicians install judges.
Supreme Court and Federal Court judges are appointed in the US. They are friends of the politicians. The public is more than capable of voting for judges.
Nearshoring has been a huge boon to Mexico’s economy. The leadership in this country has one of two choices ; get serious about reigning in corruption via cartelmania or say bubbye to the global businesses that won’t tolerate a threat to their bottom lines and therefore a boon to Mexico’s forward projection and improved economic opportunities. I don’t know who really has the answer to the former, but it may have something to do with sumpin called ” cajones”.
What is the result of “hugs not bullits.” International drug cartels exported from Mexico to Ecuador. OH AND 4000 DEAD ECUADORIANS A YEAR. sUCH IS THE MEXICAN NON INTERFERENCE POLICY.
Maybe you want to speak from the other side of your mouth as well when people say amlo Mexico. Hugs not bullets is obviously about not killing kids…. Making sure they have alternatives than joining a cartel. But you don’t care about that you want “results”. In this case you can choose to ignore how a different article talked about the Sedena and national guard took over a corrupt police station. Many instances of improvements and setbacks but jumping on such a silly argument is a little old….
Real friends tell true friends what they do not want to hear but need to hear because they care. Outside of AMLO’s orbit and Moreno party no one thinks the anti-Democratic Constitutional ‘Reforms’ are good, at least 18 are no good at all (to be fair some others are just fine but they don’t undermine democracy). Throwing one’s toys out of one’s crib is no way to gain international respect or engender more confidence in C-Suite discussions of near-shoring investment.
Well said!
Well said. I wish I could upvote this.
Would this be a permanent change? It is an experiment. If it does not work out, Mexicans can reverse it. Right?
Many U.S. judges are elected at the State level, not the Federal level or the Supreme Court, which seems a bit hypocritical.
Time for AMLO to send another strongly worder letter to the current Administration to “mind our own business” AS HIS, and soon Claudia’s nation, destroys itself internally . . .