Government requests Supreme Court to overturn labor reform suspension

The government filed a motion to request the Supreme Court overturn the suspension ordered by a judge of a large portion of the government’s labor reform, which was approved by Congress in early March. The move, called a per saltum extraordinary motion, essentially means the government filed their request directly before the Supreme Court, skipping lower-ranked courts that should deal with the appeal before reaching the top instance. On Friday, the Treasury’s Prosecution Office filed the appeal asking for the Supreme Court to review and overturn the decision of a labor judge who had left 83 of the reform’s 218 articles without effect on March 30, and for the suspension to be lifted until the High body makes a final decision on the issue. The government argued that the judge who made the ruling did not have jurisdiction over the matter. They also said that it was not the judiciary’s role to intervene and that Argentina’s Labor Confederation of Labor (CGT, by its Spanish initials), who filed the injunction that served as a base for the ruling, did not have the power to do so. Labor Judge Raúl Ojeda had stated in his March 30 ruling that the articles in question showed signs of being regressive in terms of labor rights, as well as affecting constitutional principles and could potentially lead to “irreparable damage.” The articles were temporarily left without effect until a final decision is made on the matter. The government’s filing stated that the cautionary measure that suspended the articles affects public interests and will bring “consequences of impossible ulterior reparation,” because it means the labor reform cannot be carried out in full. “It suspended a law from Congress, interfered in public policies and altered the balance of powers,” the filing said. The government also argued that the Judicial power should “stay within its jurisdiction, without meddling into the functions of other powers” and said that Judge Ojeda acted by “putting his particular interests first.” In addition, they said the judge had no authority to suspend a law with general applicability because he is not a federal judge, but rather from the Buenos Aires City jurisdiction. Constitutional lawyer Andrés Gil Domínguez wrote on X that the government’s request to the Supreme Court to take the case is inapplicable because it is a tool reserved for exceptional cases of federal jurisdiction, which this is not. Another judicial battle On Friday, the government was also expected to appeal a judicial ruling that ordered President Javier Milei to comply with a Congress-approved law that grants a funding increase for public universities. In late March, a litigation court said that the government had to put into effect a set of articles from the law aimed to raise the university staff salaries and scholarships. Milei has consistently refused to comply with this law on the grounds it goes against his zero deficit goal. He vetoed it last year and, after Congress insisted on it, and issued a decree saying he would not put into effect the articles that order the funding increase until it was established where the money would come from, which the law does state. The deadline for Milei to comply with it ended on Friday, meaning he would have to pay around AR$2.5 trillion (around US$1.8 billion). The government is now expected to file an appeal before a litigation court asking for the case to be taken by the Supreme Court. Franco Bartolacci, head of the National Inter-University Council told Punto a Punto Radio that, even if the government decides to request the Court Supreme’s intervention, “they still have the responsibility to comply” with the articles that guarantee salary and scholarship increases, which are their “most urgent” needs.