▲ The plenary of the Supreme Court of Justice decided to give a positive response to the application of the Collegiate Court in which the trial was filed.Photo María Luisa Severiano
Iván Saldaña
La Jornada newspaper
Monday, October 6, 2025, p. 8
The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation attracted a case that could redefine the criteria for thousands of migrants seeking refuge in Mexico.
The Plenary resolved last week to resume its competence to analyze the amparo in review 450/2025, promoted by two applicants who challenge article 24 of the refugee law, which forces them to present themselves weekly before the Mexican Commission for Refugee Aid (Comar) and remain in the entity where they initiated the procedure, under penalty that their request is considered abandoned.
Migrants argue that the contested disposition violates their rights to free traffic, to the refuge and equality, in addition to exposing them to detention, deportation or expulsion to countries where their life is in danger.
According to the United Nations Refugee Organization Agency, in 2024 Mexico remained among the 10 countries with the most asylum requests in the world, with almost 80 thousand registered with the region; In 2023 there were more than 140 thousand.
According to the judicial file, the case began in 2024, when the region discarded two migrants requests for “abandonment” and subsequently denied their resumption. The complainants filed on May 21 of that year demands before the Office of Common Correspondence of the District Courts in Administrative Matters in Mexico City, but on March 31, the Fourth District Court in administrative matters dismissed the trial and denied the amparo.
Unconspect, they filed a revision appeal that the sixth collegiate court in administrative matters of the First Circuit knew, an instance that on July 10 asked the Supreme Court of Justice to exercise its power of attraction.
“This Collegiate Court considers pertinent to propose to the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation that, if appropriate and appropriate by the nature and exceptional particularities of the case, exercise its power of attraction and resolve, in accordance with what is proceeded to law, the protection in revision in which it is acts,” argued the review instance.
