Days later, authorities from Jalisco, Chihuahua, Nuevo León, Guanajuato, Tamaulipas, Aguascalientes, Coahuila and Michoacán presented constitutional controversies; However, it was not until 2026 that the Court resolved.
“The previous integration of the Court had 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025 to present these constitutional controversies. I have pointed out on previous occasions (…), (the Court) was very irresponsible, because there were four years in which the investigation of these controversies was closed and the proposal was not presented and it is at this moment that once the return is carried out, that is when we are presenting,” explained the minister rapporteur Arístides Guerrero García.
Each state presented various grievances, such as that the decree is not properly founded and motivated; affects the right of federal entities to access resources that have been previously determined in their favor; The powers of the federal entities are affected, because the allocation of resources will be discretionary, and a loss of objectivity is generated in the allocation of resources.
However, the ministers declared the controversies of the eight state governments baseless.
“The lawsuits raised generic arguments about what they considered the benefits of the funds and trusts, but they did not reveal the impact on any attribution recognized in the federal Constitution,” said the rapporteur minister when presenting the endorsed project.
He also considered that this disappearance of funds does not affect the principles of division of powers or federalism that are recognized in the Constitution, but on the contrary, he said, the adjustment is appreciated in the way that the Federal Executive Branch will carry out collaboration in concurrent matters.
Minister Lenia Batres commented that the extinction of funds and trusts does not affect the powers of the states nor does it subordinate them to the federal government.
Furthermore, he pointed out that these allowed discretionary and non-transparent management in the use of public resources.
“The trusts were used to prevent transparency in the exercise of our nation’s resources, hence it is correct to recognize the validity of the contested decree by which this type of public funds and trusts were eliminated in accordance with the principle of state stewardship and in harmony with articles 40 and 124 of our Constitution,” he declared.
