Mexican Supreme Court rules criminalization of abortion in Federal Penal Code unconstitutional


null / Credit: Shutterstock

ACI Prensa Staff, Sep 6, 2023 / 18:50 pm (CNA).

In a brief post on X (formerly Twitter), the Mexican Supreme Court announced Wednesday that in response to a legal challenge it has ruled that the articles criminalizing abortion in the Federal Penal Code are unconstitutional.

The court’s First Chamber “ruled that the legal system that penalizes abortion in the Federal Criminal Code is unconstitutional, since it violates the human rights of women and persons with the capacity to gestate.”

The court itself cannot decriminalize abortion. The Federal Congress will have to comply and make the changes in the articles in question.

The draft ruling was prepared by Justice Ana Margarita Ríos Farjat and approved with her vote and that of the other four members of the First Chamber: Jorge Mario Pardo Rebolledo, Arturo Zaldívar Lelo de Larrea, Juan Luis González Alcantárá Carranca, and Alfredo Gutierrez Ortiz Mena.

The ruling responds to a legal challenge to the constitutionality of the law (amparo) filed by a civil association, unnamed in the text, against articles 330, 331, and 332 of the Federal Penal Code, which establish sanctions for women who abort, for health professionals who perform the procedure, and for those who pressure women to abort.

Reuters reported that the association is GIRE, an acronym in Spanish for Information Group on Reproductive Choice, which celebrated the decision.

The lawsuit also challenges articles 333 and 334, which establish the cases when the crime of abortion is not punishable such as carelessness on the part of the pregnant woman (unintentional miscarriage), rape, and danger to the life of the mother.

The ruling by the First Chamber of the Supreme Court “safeguards and protects” the association that filed the constitutional protection lawsuit.

“This First Chamber considers that the declaration of unconstitutionality translates into a tangible benefit for the plaintiff civil association, in terms of the correct development of its corporate purpose, since it will allow it to guarantee that the women and persons with the capacity to gestate that it accompanies have access to services of safe and quality abortion, and that neither they nor the personnel who seeks an interruption of the pregnancy are criminalized under any circumstances,” the ruling states.

Following the approval of the draft ruling, a substantially same final version will be issued in which the judges may express their individual opinions.

What does the Supreme Court ruling mean for abortion in Mexico?

In a statement to ACI Prensa, CNA’s Spanish-language news partner, Marcial Padilla, director of the pro-life platform ConParticipación, considers that the ruling of the First Chamber of the SCJN “does not directly alter the Federal Penal Code, since this would have to be done by senators and representatives.”

“As citizens we must ensure that this changes and that the only just and reasonable thing is to protect the mother and the child equally,” he said.

This story was first published by ACI Prensa, CNA’s Spanish-language news partner. It has been translated and adapted by CNA.

If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.

About Catholic News Agency 8384 Articles
Catholic News Agency (


  1. Deliberately providing places in the Church or society with known or declared purveyors of abortion, contraception or homosexualism, on the idea that there will always be a someone else to convert to the priesthood to make up for it with “clean new water”, “accompaniment” and “do not abandon us in temptation”; is not the way of the Christ’s priesthood.

    It offers an attractiveness of sharing liberality and being open-minded and wide-ranging, but the attraction is the devil. Catchy. Listen man, look at the other disaster your delegates are producing in Mexico.

    The Council of Jerusalem – THE VERY FIRST COUNCIL – settled it that you must abstain from such things and their affairs. How can you be indulging yourself while telling people not to be Gnostic! This codicil was asserted by James and made into communique with his Jerusalem community. These are the ones Paul had recourse to on account of Peter’s waywardness.

    To them, Peter made himself subject. They were strength for him against his spirit melting with Judaizers and he knew it. By this time Peter had received the Spirit, cured a beggar, saw the death of Ananias and Sapphira, healed Aeneas, raised Tabitha, converted Cornelius, witnessed the murder of Stephen and the conversion of Paul; yet couldn’t bolster himself!

  2. It is not Peter’s assignment to co-opt the faithful to a false universalism, whether as Pope or otherwise. It would not do then for Peter to try to allay their rejection of it telling them that “God places his hope in the small and the humble”. Unacceptable added to unacceptable is more unacceptable.

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. Mexican Supreme Court rules criminalization of abortion in Federal Penal Code unconstitutional – Via Nova

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.