On October 16, 2025, it was published in the evening edition of the Official Gazette of the Federation,
a decree that reforms and adds various provisions to the Amparo Law, the Tax Code of
the Federation (“CFF”) and the Organic Law of the Federal Court of Administrative Justice
(“TFJA”). On paper, the central objective of the reform is to modernize procedures
judicial, incorporate the use of electronic means in procedural actions, regulate with
greater precision in the suspension of the claimed act and delimit the origin of the protection in matters
prosecutors and human rights protection. However, beyond its purpose, the reform
introduces adjustments that, in practice, could restrict citizens' scope for defense and
companies.
I. Digitalization and Electronic Media in the Amparo Trial.
The reform establishes the possibility of presenting promotions in both printed and printed formats.
electronic, favoring the use of the Online Services Portal of the Judiciary of the
Federation. Notifications to the parties and authorities should preferably be made by
electronic means, using the Electronic Signature, which will have the same legal effects
than the autograph signature. The integration of electronic and physical files is planned, as well as the
the obligation of authorities to create institutional profiles in the digital system. In reality,
These measures do not constitute an absolute innovation, since they respond to a practice that is already in place.
had been consolidating in recent years; the reform rather seeks to formalize its regulatory framework
and provide it with greater legal security, incorporating certain adjustments and technical improvements to
uniform its application in all jurisdictional bodies. However, it is guaranteed that the
access to justice is not conditioned to the use of digital media, allowing the presentation in
paper if the promoting party so decides.
II. Delimitation of the Concept of Legitimate Interest for the Admissibility of Protection.
The concept of legitimate interest is redefined and delimited, establishing stricter requirements for
its accreditation and, therefore, for the admissibility of the amparo trial when the complainant alleges
have it. According to the new text, to prove legitimate interest it will be necessary to: i) existence
of a real injury that is different from that of other people; ii) that the annulment of the act or
omission claimed generates a certain and direct benefit if the protection is granted; and (iii)
that said benefit is not merely hypothetical or eventual.
These requirements imply a strict delimitation of the concept as opposed to the tendency
which had been adopted following the constitutional reform on human rights in June
Hand in hand with this change, a more rigorous standard is adopted to prove interest.
legitimate, which distorts the original purpose of this figure, since the legitimate interest was
conceived precisely as a mechanism that would allow a community, without the need for
prove a violated subjective right, defend oneself against the violation of norms
constitutional rights that protect specific diffuse or collective interests, for the benefit of said
community.
III. Suspension of the Claimed Act.
Regarding the regulation of the suspension of the claimed act, a list of requirements is established
that the Judges must evaluate for its concession when it is requested at the request of a party, which
are: i) the existence or a reasonable presumption of the existence of the act complained of; ii) existence
of an injury arising from the act complained of, even if it is indicative; (iii) that the concession
that the measure does not contravene public order or the social interest, as well as that it does not cause
significant damage to the community, nor deprive society of benefits that it ordinarily receives
correspond; and, you) that the appearance of good law arises. These requirements are already
They were provided for by the Constitution and in Jurisprudence, but the reform now incorporates them.
expressly within the text of the Amparo Law, which provides greater clarity regarding
of your application.
On the other hand, the reform restricts the admissibility of the suspension of the claimed act to
introduce new assumptions in which it is presumed that its concession would affect the social interest,
particularly in financial, administrative, fiscal and prevention of operations with
resources of illicit origin. With the exception that in the fiscal area, the suspension may
be granted at the discretion of the complainant, provided that he provides sufficient guarantee of the interest
tax, also providing specific rules for firm tax credits.
IV. Extension of the Claim and Procedural Deadlines.
The extension of the claim will only proceed when the complainant is aware of
acts of authority related to those claimed in the initial claim and that had not been
previously known. The possibility of expanding the claim outside the assumptions is restricted
expressly provided for, which implies a greater requirement for completeness in the request
initial and restricts the flexibility of this figure, limiting its efficiency and reducing the possibility of
possibility of accumulating processes, opening the door to contradictory sentences in cases where
now the accumulation does not proceed.
V. Adjustments in Fiscal and Administrative Matters.
The admissibility of the amparo trial, the administrative revocation appeal and the
Administrative litigation against acts related to the collection of tax credits
that have become final and requests for prescription of said credits.
VI. Responsibility of Public Servants and Sanctions.
The obligations of public servants in the integration and management of files are reinforced,
as well as in the fulfillment of the protection resolutions, providing for criminal sanctions and
administrative measures in case of non-compliance.
VII. Transitional Provisions.
The decree entered into force the day after its publication. The Authority is granted 360 calendar days.
of Judicial Administration to adapt the electronic system and issue general agreements
necessary for the correct integration of files and the operation of digital media.
Additionally, the Third Transitory establishes that, under the pretext that it is a law
procedural, that the concluded procedural stages that have generated acquired rights will be governed
by the law in force at the beginning of the respective process, but that the reform will be applied to subsequent procedural actions, without this supposedly implying retroactive application or affecting
acquired rights, as these are future actions.
VIII. Conclusion.
The reform represents a step forward in the modernization of constitutional and fiscal justice,
incorporate technological tools and specify the procedural requirements for the provenance and
processing of the protection.
However, it introduces relevant restrictions on the suspension and extension of demand,
as well as in the defense of tax credits, which will directly impact the strategies
litigation and access to justice in tax and administrative matters. Likewise, the transitional
on the possible application of the reform to ongoing Amparo Trials, would probably generate
severe problems in its application, giving rise to conflicting interpretations, especially with the
recent arrival of new judges following the judicial reform of 2024.