MEXICO CITY — President Claudia Sheinbaum has formally sent Mexico’s Congress a constitutional reform that would require anyone seeking the presidency, a state governorship, or the head of government post in Mexico City to hold Mexican nationality exclusively, forcing candidates with dual citizenship to formally renounce any foreign nationality before registering their candidacy.
What the Reform Requires
Sheinbaum first announced the proposal at her August 27 mañanera and formally delivered it to Mexico’s Permanent Commission on August 30, from where it was assigned to the Chamber of Deputies as the chamber of origin.
The initiative would amend Articles 82, 116, and 122 of Mexico’s Constitution, explicitly requiring that anyone seeking these three specific offices “not hold nor acquire” a foreign nationality.
Presidential legal counsel Luisa María Alcalde explained that candidates who currently hold dual nationality would need to renounce their foreign citizenship before registering as a candidate with electoral authorities — and that renunciation would need to go beyond a simple declaration to Mexican authorities, requiring candidates to complete the necessary procedures with the foreign government that granted the other nationality as well, to formally confirm they retain only their legal tie to Mexico.
The reform would also apply the requirement continuously, not just at the moment of election: officials holding these posts would be barred from acquiring or requesting another nationality, using foreign identification documents, exercising political rights tied to another country, or invoking that country’s diplomatic protection for the duration of their time in office.
As the initiative’s text puts it, “the exclusive loyalty required to access the position must be preserved for as long as the public responsibility exists.”
Secondary legislation to Mexico’s Nationality Law would still need to define the specific procedural steps for confirming a candidate’s renunciation before the National Electoral Institute (INE).
Sheinbaum’s Stated Rationale
At her August 27 press conference, Sheinbaum framed the measure around protecting Mexico’s sovereignty and avoiding conflicts of interest for anyone occupying the country’s most powerful executive positions. “Que el interés superior sea México, ningún otro país” — “That the paramount interest be Mexico, no other country,” she said.
Sheinbaum emphasized the reform does not seek to eliminate or question dual nationality for millions of ordinary Mexicans, which the proposal’s own text acknowledges as a legitimate reality for people with family, migratory, or personal ties to other countries — the restriction applies solely to the small set of top executive offices named in the reform.
Political Context
While Sheinbaum’s office has framed the measure in general constitutional terms, the initiative gained a specific political dimension this past week tied to Francisco García Cabeza de Vaca, the former governor of Tamaulipas. Sheinbaum has noted that Cabeza de Vaca holds both Mexican and American nationality, and on August 26, the former PAN governor confirmed his intention to run in Mexico’s 2030 presidential election, accusing the reform of being aimed specifically at him — what he called having his name “on the dedication.”
Cabeza de Vaca’s 2024 congressional candidacy was previously revoked by Mexico’s electoral tribunal (TEPJF), though that decision rested on outstanding arrest warrants against him and his status as a fugitive from justice, not on any dual-nationality issue.
The underlying constitutional principle isn’t new: Article 32 of Mexico’s Constitution already reserves certain positions requiring Mexican-born status to individuals who don’t acquire another nationality, and the Nationality Law already provides for a Certificate of Mexican Nationality for qualifying individuals.
Sheinbaum’s reform seeks to close what her government describes as a legal gap: the current framework does not clearly specify what happens to someone who already holds another nationality at the time of election, nor does it prevent an official from acquiring a new foreign nationality once already in office.
The American Society of Mexico Objects
The reform drew a sharp public rebuke, however, from Larry Rubin, president of the American Society of Mexico, who called the initiative a “grave error.” Citlalli Hernández Mora, president of Morena’s National Elections Commission, responded directly to Rubin on X, acknowledging that “dual citizenship is a right,” while maintaining that the proposal’s purpose is narrower and more specific: ensuring that individuals occupying these particular public offices — those meant to represent Mexico’s interests specifically — hold Mexican citizenship exclusively while doing so.
Hernández Mora’s response framed the measure as compatible with, rather than opposed to, the broader legitimacy of dual citizenship for ordinary Mexican citizens.
Local Politics
The reform’s scope is deliberately narrow. It applies only to the presidency, state governorships, and Mexico City’s head of government position — it does not extend to mayoralties or the large number of other local public offices across Mexico.
There is currently no federal constitutional rule requiring Mexican-born status for all such local positions, and Mexico’s Supreme Court has determined that state legislatures cannot unilaterally impose that requirement on offices not already reserved by the federal Constitution.
As part of the standard legislative requirements for constitutional reforms with budgetary implications, Mexico’s Finance Secretariat (SHCP) has already issued its assessment of the initiative’s budgetary impact, in compliance with Article 18 of the Federal Budget and Fiscal Responsibility Law.
No firm deadline has yet been set for the relevant committees in the Chamber of Deputies to issue their formal opinion (dictamen), though formal committee analysis is expected to begin in the coming days.
With the reform now formally before Congress and committee review expected to begin shortly, its path forward will likely continue to be shaped by the same tension already visible in its first two weeks of public debate: broad rhetorical support for the principle of exclusive national loyalty in top office, alongside genuine pushback — from figures like Rubin and potential future candidates like Cabeza de Vaca — over whether the measure represents legitimate sovereignty protection or a more targeted political maneuver aimed at specific rivals.
