Ban on general effects in amparo forces dismissal only as a last resort
Constitutional prohibition on granting general effects in amparo against general rules. It must be interpreted so that it only requires dismissal when it is technically impossible to tailor the effects of a protective ruling (interpretation of article 107, section II, of the Federal Constitution).
Official heading (Spanish): PROHIBICIÓN CONSTITUCIONAL DE OTORGAR EFECTOS GENERALES EN EL AMPARO RESPECTO DE NORMAS GENERALES. DEBE INTERPRETARSE DE FORMA QUE SÓLO OBLIGUE A SOBRESEER CUANDO NO SEA TÉCNICAMENTE POSIBLE MODULAR LOS EFECTOS DE UN FALLO PROTECTOR (INTERPRETACIÓN DEL ARTÍCULO 107, FRACCIÓN II, DE LA CONSTITUCIÓN FEDERAL).
The ruling
An individual challenged the Time Zones Law, which eliminated daylight saving time, as harmful to the right to a healthy environment. The District Court dismissed the case. During the appeal, the constitutional amendment barring general effects in amparo took effect. The Collegiate Circuit Court held that the ban only requires dismissal when it is technically impossible to tailor the ruling's effects.
Our take
The amendment to article 107 of the Constitution threatened to close the door on collective amparo against statutes. This court reads it narrowly: it separates de facto striking down of a rule, which is now barred, from supra-individual relief that repairs a diffuse right without voiding the law, which remains available. It is an isolated precedent, and other courts may disagree. For companies and associations litigating environmental, regulatory or competition matters, it offers a useful argument against automatic dismissal. Propose specific tailored relief in the complaint itself.
What to do
- In amparo over collective or diffuse rights, propose tailored relief that does not strike down the rule.
- Cite this ruling against dismissals based solely on the ban on general effects.
Details
- Court
- Collegiate Circuit Court
- Type
- Isolated precedent
- Identifier
- I.22o.A.4 K (11a.)
- Digital registry
- 2032269
- Published
- June 12, 2026
- Area
- Amparo and constitutional
- View official source ↗
Does this ruling affect your company? Let’s talk.
Schedule a conversationOther precedents in the same area
Prepared by Artegia for information only; not legal advice. Headings in English are unofficial translations. The official text is the one published in the Semanario Judicial de la Federación or the TFJA journal.