In recent times, the Mexican government has worked hard to reshape perceptions, showing that its primary trading partners are also crucial allies in addressing immigration and drug trafficking issues. Yet, a recent judicial election has cast a shadow on these efforts, with Silvia Del Gado Garcia—known for representing Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman—now seen as emblematic of the Mexican judicial system.
In February, President Claudia Sinbaum’s administration extradited Rafael Caroquintero, a notorious drug lord linked to the 1985 murder of DEA agent Enrique “Kiki” Camarena, to the U.S. This was no minor achievement; previous U.S. presidents, including Reagan, Bush (both of them), Clinton, Obama, and Biden, all sought Mexico’s help in apprehending those involved in the crime. Interestingly, it seems President Trump succeeded in this diplomatic gesture by securing the extradition of 28 major drug criminals.
Additionally, Mexico dispatched a contingent of 10,000 personnel to the U.S. border, dedicating substantial resources for border security, likely as reassurance to the American side. This move highlights Mexico’s commitment to shared responsibility regarding immigration and its willingness to accept immigrants expelled from other countries.
The country has also made strides in battling drug production, aiming to dissuade the U.S. from imposing new trade tariffs. Earlier this month, Mexican authorities seized 42 tons of methamphetamine and 2,300 gallons of chemical precursors, marking a significant crackdown on drug trafficking.
In a striking shift, Mexico has transitioned from denying the existence of fentanyl production to conducting its largest fentanyl seizure ever.
Despite some usual anti-American sentiments regarding security, the Mexican government has, at least nominally, not opposed recent developments, including the deployment of three U.S. destroyers near its waters.
However, these collaborative security efforts have been jeopardized by the outcomes of Mexico’s recent judicial elections. The ruling party has gained tight control over the judiciary, allowing controversial figures associated with drug lords to gain influence. The participation in these judicial elections was alarmingly low, with just 13% of eligible voters showing up, which has already begun to negatively affect Mexico’s investment climate. Legal security seems not only weakened but almost entirely undermined. This erosion will have repercussions for both U.S. investments and the broader Mexican economy.
Unfortunately, it appears that Mexico has favored family ties and party loyalty over merit and professionalism in judicial appointments. Such choices seem to push the nation closer to resembling a failed state rather than a robust democracy, which could turn it into a precarious partner rather than a reliable ally.
While there has been an attempt to address differences through diplomacy, the judicial appointments that seem to promote individuals close to criminal figures signal to investors a troubling message about accountability and trust.
