En esta noticia
The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, SCJN, issued a ruling that changes the rules for livestock transport in Mexico. The Full Court determined that several state permits can no longer be required. “The transit permit may exist as an instrument to prove ownership”, the highest court stated in its ruling.
The decision was made in ruling on Constitutional Controversy 216/2025, considered in a Full Court session on March 10, 2026. In the ruling, the Supreme Court clarified that certain local requirements in Nayarit encroached on federal powers, so their application has now been rendered ineffective.
In the official statement, the Supreme Court explained that some state provisions sought to control the movement of animals through local authorizations.
“In practice, they established a state system of prior authorization to move livestock,” the court indicated, which contradicts the powers established in the Mexican Constitution.
The Supreme Court validates ownership documents, but not state controls
The ruling distinguishes between the documents used to prove ownership of livestock and those that function as mandatory permits for their transport. The justices validated part of the Nayarit Livestock Law that recognizes administrative instruments to demonstrate possession or transfer of animals.
According to the statement, these mechanisms may remain because they do not constitute a mandatory filter for the movement of livestock.
“These provisions fall within the authority of the federative entities to legislate in civil and administrative matters,” the Court explained in justifying the validity of those records.
State permits to move livestock are invalidated
However, the Full Court invalidated several articles of the same law that required obtaining state permits before transporting or exporting livestock, products, and livestock byproducts. These included transit permits numbered by local authorities or authorizations issued by inspectors.
The Supreme Court emphasized that this type of control falls within the federal sphere, especially in health matters.
“These provisions invade the Federation’s sphere of competence in matters of general health,” the court concluded, making it clear that states cannot impose prior authorizations for the movement of livestock.