Constitutional dialogue for troubled democracies.
The Mexican Supreme Court: between the old, the new and the transformative.
Latin American Courts: dislocated democracies and the equality, freedom and pluralism agenda.
On 2013, Argentina’s “Democratization of Justice” reform sought to neutralize the blockade of the Government’s decisions for the achievement of a justice system that reflected popular will. After Macri´s victory, the last two judges proposed by the Administration stated that their rulings would be deferential towards the will of popular representatives. On 2018, Justice Zaldívar, the newly elected Chief Justice of the Mexican Court, declared that “judges should listen to the social demand to end the inequalities that hurt Mexico. As Judges, we can and should promote the necessary structural changes in order to achieve a fairer and more egalitarian society.” From these perspectives, this lecture will present different models of constitutional judges, arguing in favor of a judge’s profile as distant from the radical deferential thesis as the one that defends a judge that is compelled to ground their determinations on personal valuations of justice.