In recent years, Mexico has witnessed a growing trend of legal actions used to intimidate and restrict journalists and media outlets, raising concerns about freedom of expression in the country. According to multiple media rights organizations, politicians and public officials have increasingly employed civil, criminal, and electoral laws as tools to file lawsuits, impose fines, and obtain court orders against critical reporting. These measures, which include charges such as terrorism and accusations of gender-based political violence, are viewed by many as a form of judicial harassment aimed at silencing dissent.
Mexico remains one of the most perilous countries for journalists, with nearly 180 reporters killed since 2000. While threats and violence against the press continue, legal tactics now represent a less overt but increasingly pervasive challenge. Experts and journalists describe a climate in which fear of protracted litigation, heavy financial penalties, and imprisonment is prompting self-censorship or avoidance of certain topics, particularly those involving powerful political figures.
Non-governmental organizations tracking these developments recorded a record 69 legal cases targeting the media in 2025, more than triple the previous year’s figures. Many of these cases are driven by political parties, candidates, or public officials, and have involved the use of recently passed laws with broad and sometimes vague language. Critics argue that poorly drafted legislation provides judges and officials with wide discretion to exploit these rules. One example involved a local community radio station and several journalists found guilty of gender-based political violence for their reporting on a female candidate, resulting in fines, mandated public apologies, and content deletion.
Supporters of such laws maintain they are legitimate protections, especially regarding gender-based violence. Senator Martha Lucía Micher, who helped promote Mexico’s legal framework in that area, rejects suggestions that laws are being weaponized to censor dissenting voices. She emphasized that some journalism can be misogynistic and expressed openness to reviewing how cases are adjudicated, stating her belief that these laws are not being abused but are necessary protections for victims.
The political context further complicates the situation. Former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who took office in 2018, notably reduced government advertising spending on media while using daily televised briefings to shape narratives and openly criticize journalists. His successor and Morena party ally, Claudia Sheinbaum, has expressed support for press freedom but also defended Morena officials’ use of legal avenues against reporters and urged boycotts of media organizations critical of her administration. She has rejected claims of censorship, arguing such actions reflect political opinion rather than state suppression.
Several journalists and media outlets have faced serious legal consequences. For instance, Rafael León, a crime reporter in Veracruz, was arrested and charged with terrorism and other offenses after covering organized crime. Although terrorism charges were dropped following Sheinbaum’s comments questioning the prosecution, León remains under investigation and has curtailed his reporting activities. Similarly, The Tribune, a newspaper in Campeche, suspended printed editions due to legal pressures and financial difficulties attributed to government actions, including lawsuits and withdrawal of official advertising.
These cases reflect broader concerns about a fraught relationship between Mexican authorities and the press. Historically, during the one-party era, much journalism was aligned with the government, but the rise of a more independent media from the 1990s onward increased tensions amidst corruption and crime. Today’s complex landscape combines formal legal pressures with political rhetoric targeting journalists, raising debates over where legitimate accountability ends and censorship begins. Authorities and advocates continue to dispute the nature and impact of such legal actions, highlighting ongoing tensions over freedom of expression in Mexico.