The Paradox of Supreme Court Precedents under the Labor Modernization Act

Abstract

This article examines the constitutional and conventional validity of Section 89 of Law No. 27,802, which requires judges to conform their decisions to the precedents of the Supreme Court of Argentina under penalty of removal for judicial misconduct. It argues that the reform transforms a duty to provide legal reasoning into a binding obligation of compliance, thereby altering the institutional balance of Argentina’s republican and federal system. It also analyzes its tension with the Court’s Espíndola (2019) doctrine, which rejects the absolute binding force of its own precedents, and assesses the implications for judicial independence and provincial autonomy.