Milei reforms by decree the system for appointing Argentina's Supreme Court justices
Key takeaways
- The measure, made official on Tuesday, was questioned by legal experts and judicial-sector organizations.
- Decree 467/2026, also signed by Justice Minister Juan Bautista Mahiques, modifies the 2003 rules that governed the appointment of the top court's justices, the Procurador General and the Defensor General.
- The Executive did not release arguments to defend removing the criteria of gender, territorial and specialty representativeness.
Why this matters: an international story with cross-border implications worth tracking.
Argentina's President Javier Milei reformed by decree the system for appointing Supreme Court justices: he eliminated a stage of citizen participation prior to the nomination and removed the recommendation to consider criteria of gender, specialty and regional-origin diversity. The measure, made official on Tuesday, was questioned by legal experts and judicial-sector organizations.
Decree 467/2026, also signed by Justice Minister Juan Bautista Mahiques, modifies the 2003 rules that governed the appointment of the top court's justices, the Procurador General and the Defensor General. The new regime eliminates the stage, in force for more than two decades, in which citizens, non-governmental organizations, professional bar associations and academic entities could present founded observations on the candidates over a 15-day period, before the Executive sent the nominations to the Senate. It also repeals the obligation to publish the candidacies in national newspapers; their dissemination will be limited to the Official Gazette and the Justice Ministry website.
The government said the changes seek to streamline the procedure and avoid administrative duplications, and argued that citizen participation is maintained in the Senate, where —according to the decree— the publicity and public evaluation of candidates are guaranteed. The reform does not alter the constitutional procedure: Court justices will continue to be proposed by the president, subjected to public hearings and challenges in the upper house, and approved by two-thirds of the senators. The Executive did not release arguments to defend removing the criteria of gender, territorial and specialty representativeness.