The Plenary of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, in resolving the contradiction of criteria No. 111/2025, determined that the Collegiate Circuit Courts must resolve related direct constitutional claims in the same session, even when the complaining party alleges illegal summons to trial, provided that such claimant does not qualify as a “third party by equivalence.”

The Plenary reasoned that, pursuant to Article 107, Section III, Subsection a) of the Constitution, the Collegiate Circuit Courts are required to examine all procedural violations raised by the parties, as well those identified ex officio under the principle of supplementing the complaint, to avoid unnecessary delays in the final resolution of disputes. Likewise, Article 172, Section I, of the Amparo Law establishes as a violation of the rules of procedure in direct constitutional claim cases the failure to properly summon the claimant to trial.  amparo that the complainant is not summoned to the trial or is summoned in a different manner. In this regard, illegal summons constitutes a procedural violation that must be examined together with the other violations alleged in the direct amparo claims in the same session, when the direct amparo is resolved.

Therefore, the Collegiate Circuit Court should neither decline jurisdiction nor remit the claim to a District Court, nor suspend the processing of the remaining related direct claim. This approach ensures the constitutional guarantee of prompt, complete and expeditious administration, while avoiding fragmentation and delays on the comprehensive resolution or related matters by concentrating their adjudication in decisions issued during the same session.

This precedent was published on Friday, January 2, 2026, in the Federal Judicial Weekly under digital registry number 2031613.

For any questions or legal assistance regarding constitutional proceedings, please contact admin@gpdlaw.mx