The U.S. Meddling in Mexico’s Politics is More Authoritarian Imperialism
The United States of America, a country with more internal problems than most and with a withering democracy continues to bully other countries about what are and aren’t democratic norms
Recently, the U.S. Ambassador to Mexico, Ken Salazar said that a judicial overhaul by Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador is a threat to Mexico’s democracy. The proposal requiring Mexican judges to be elected instead of appointed has sparked outrage among senior U.S. government officials who are once again weaponizing “democracy” to villainize other world leaders outside of the U.S.
Despite the myriad issues brought to light in recent years highlighting the politicization of U.S. federal courts through lifetime appointments by presidents and confirmed by Congress, Mexico’s neighbor to the north seems to think they should follow its path. In the U.S., the vast majority of voters have expressed a need to modernize its Supreme Court while Salazar’s rhetoric points to the lack of a desire to adhere to the people’s demands.
Even Republican voters support reforms to the Supreme Court proposed by President Joe Biden which include calling for a code of conduct, 18-year term limits, and a Constitutional amendment declaring no one is above the law, not even the president. In the U.S., most believe that refusing to reform the court is a threat to democracy. But when Mexico wants to reform its courts it is somehow the opposite – a hypocrisy often only found in U.S. foreign policy.
Salazar said President Obrador’s proposed reforms would “help cartels and other bad actors take advantage of inexperienced judges with political motivations,” and claimed they would “create turbulence,” politically and economically for years. The crystal ball he, investors, and financial institutions are looking at must be telling them that they will no longer have the power over the Mexican judicial system they currently have.
“Democracies can’t function without a strong, independent and non-corrupt judicial branch,” Salazar told reporters. “Any judicial reform needs to have safeguards that the judicial branch is strengthened, and not the subject to political conditions.”
Quite the statement after being made aware that current corrupt judges in Mexico would have to face elections by the people they’re supposed to represent. What’s really at issue are the quite popular and broad social and economic reforms enacted while López Obrador has been in office and will continue as President-elect Claudia Sheinbaum promised in her campaign to become Mexico's next president. An election she won by huge margins.
Sheinbaum has defended López Obrador’s proposal.
While the U.S. and Western media say that under López Obrador’s proposal “anyone” with a law degree would be able to run, that’s not entirely true. They are required to have at least years of experience and be vetted by committees created by each judicial branch and Mexico’s Congress to ensure they have the credentials needed to serve. Only then can the candidates be allowed to run for election.
López Obrador, known for speaking out against U.S. corruption and the harm its intelligence agencies routinely inflict on Mexico, isn’t taking Salazar’s comments lightly.
"There has been a lack of respect for our sovereignty, like this unfortunate, reckless statement from Ambassador Ken Salazar yesterday," said López Obrador. “We don't accept any representative of foreign governments intervening in affairs that only correspond to us.”
While the idea is just a proposal, Mexico’s newly elected Congress takes office on September 1 and could take up a vote before López Obrador leaves office on September 30. The plan also requires a change to Mexico’s constitution which needs a two-thirds majority in its Congress to pass. Salazar’s comments seem to be trying to influence that vote.
This latest volley comes on the heels of much inflammatory rhetoric from U.S. elected officials, government agencies, and even state leaders who have all sought to provoke a reaction from the Mexican government. López Obrador, for his part, has laughed most of them off and has instead opted to expose classified CIA, DEA, and other three-letter agency operations against him, his government, and the Mexican people.
Meanwhile, in the U.S. the majority of judges are selected through elections. Five states select all of their judges through partisan elections and 39 states use elections to choose at least some of their judges. Over the last 20 years, those elections have become hyperpartisan, expensive, and dominated by special interest groups – a point President-elect Sheinbaum highlighted.
“In 43 of the 50 states of the United States of America, judges are elected by popular vote,” said Shienbaumon on social media.
According to the Equal Justice Initiative, from 2000-2009, judicial campaign spending totaled $206.9 million—more than double what it had been in the 1990s. Considering that the Federalist Society also influenced the selection of many federal court judges – including Supreme Court Justices – it hardly sounds like a beacon of democracy or justice in the U.S. The lack of an independent, impartial, and fair judiciary makes Salazar’s comments even more hypocritical.
The U.S. should learn from López Obrador’s reforms instead of criticizing them.
But, as we all know, U.S. foreign policy favors far-right dictators that grant it access to resources it can steal from the citizens of those countries leaving vast populations in poverty. Hence, the propaganda from some of the highest levels of the U.S. government especially considering López Obrador’s economic reforms included buying and nationalizing Mexico’s oil industry and regularly donating to and trading fuel, medical supplies, and food with countries like Cuba.
I’m a freelance writer and journalist for The Antagonist Magazine and Unicorn Riot. Find me on TikTok, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Mastodon, and Threads. To support my work become a paid subscriber or donate on Venmo, PayPal, or CashApp