Abortion Myths
← Back
State constitutions protecting life from conception prevent the decriminalization of abortion: FALSE
Constitutional protection of life from the moment of conception does not constitute a legal barrier to decriminalization or access to abortion services.
In 2008, in response to the decriminalization of abortion in Mexico City and with the intention of preventing it from being replicated, lawmakers in some federal entities began making significant reforms to their state constitutions to include the protection of life from the moment of conception. Although these state-level changes did not constitute a legal barrier to reforming criminal codes and liberalizing abortion, nor to accessing abortion on the grounds already provided for, they became a source of significant confusion.
To date, these reforms remain in force in the constitutions of thirteen federal entities, including Baja California, Coahuila, and Quintana Roo, where abortion has also been decriminalized in criminal codes during a period close to the beginning of pregnancy. This demonstrates that constitutional protection of life from conception does not prevent the decriminalization of abortion.
| State Constitutions That Protect Life from Conception | |
|---|---|
Federal Entity | Article |
Baja California | Article 7, paragraph 1 |
Chihuahua | Article 5, paragraph 1 |
Coahuila | Article 173, paragraph 3 |
Durango | Article 3, paragraph 1 |
Guanajuato | Article 1, paragraph 4 |
Jalisco | Article 4, paragraph 1 |
Morelos | Article 1 bis |
Nayarit | Article 7, fraction XIII, subsection 1 |
Puebla | Article 26, fraction IV |
Querétaro | Article 2, paragraph 13 |
Quintana Roo | Article 13 |
Sonora | Article 1
Source: Created by GIRE |
In 2011, the Supreme Court examined two actions of unconstitutionality challenging the constitutional reforms of San Luis Potosí and Baja California that provide absolute protection to the product of conception. The Court held that protection of life during gestation is compatible with the decriminalization of abortion at the woman’s request.
Subsequently, in 2021, the SCJN issued new criteria regarding the protection of life from conception:
- In Action of Unconstitutionality 106/2018 and its consolidated case 107/2018, the Plenary discussed the constitutionality of “protection of life from conception” in Sinaloa. By a majority vote, the SCJN established that state legislatures lack the authority to define when life begins and therefore cannot determine personhood or assign it a general and absolute form of protection that restricts the rights of women and other pregnant people. Therefore, such provisions cannot be used as grounds to deny services related to the sexual and reproductive health of women and other people with the capacity to gestate, nor to restrict access to abortion. The Court thus declared unconstitutional the provision of the Constitution of Sinaloa that protected life from conception.
- Following the Sinaloa case, the Plenary of the SCJN ruled on:
- Action of Unconstitutionality 41/2019 and its consolidated case 42/2019, filed by the National Human Rights Commission and the Human Rights Commission of the State of Nuevo León;
- Action of Unconstitutionality 85/2016, filed in Veracruz by the National Human Rights Commission; and
- Action of Unconstitutionality 72/2021 and its consolidated case 74/2021, filed by the Human Rights Commission of the State of Aguascalientes and the National Human Rights Commission.
In all three cases, the SCJN declared unconstitutional the provisions that protected the right to life from conception in the state constitutions of Nuevo León, Veracruz, and Aguascalientes. The Court reiterated that these regulations seek to restrict other fundamental rights—particularly those of women and pregnant people—such as the right to reproductive autonomy.
Unlike its 2011 rulings (in the actions of unconstitutionality concerning San Luis Potosí and Baja California), in 2021 the SCJN did not limit itself to determining the compatibility of protection of life from conception with the decriminalization of abortion. Instead, its decision was to strike down the provisions of state constitutions that protected life from conception (in Sinaloa, Nuevo León, Veracruz, and Aguascalientes).
More recently, in December 2024, the Congress of San Luis Potosí approved the removal of the clause protecting life from conception in the state, with 19 votes in favor, 5 against, and 0 abstentions. The reform was published on May 27, 2025, in the state’s Official Gazette.
In addition, on 20 April 2026, in deciding Amparo in Review 426/2025, the SCJN declared the second paragraph of Article 16 of the Constitution of the State of Tamaulipas unconstitutional. The provision protected life “from the moment of fertilization until natural death.” The Court held that it violated human rights, particularly reproductive rights, by giving greater protection to prenatal life than to the rights of women and other people with the capacity to gestate.
