Mexican Surpreme Court: Recent ruling by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) redefines how cannabis possession cases should be handled: weight alone is no longer sufficient to presume a crime | Cannabis Law Report | How to buy Skittles Moonrock online

Learn how to order CBD Oil online. TOP QUALITY GRADE A++

Cannabyss Inc. is the best place online to buy top quality weed, cannabis, vape, marijuana and CBD products. Get your borderless orders delivered at the pickup spot with ease. Top Grade products for client satisfaction.

👉 Click here to Visit our shop! 🛒

9 February 2026

El Planteo report:

Google  Translate

Not all situations are the same, and now the Mexican justice system is obligated to recognize this. A recent ruling by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) of Mexico redefines how cannabis possession cases should be handled: weight alone is no longer sufficient to presume a crime. The social, cultural, and personal context comes into play as part of the judicial analysis, as reported by Ámbito.

The logic that for years separated the “user” from the “street-level dealer” using a rigid number is beginning to crumble. Possessing more than five grams does not automatically imply a criminal charge if there is evidence of personal use, something that must now be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. In other words: the scale is no longer the sole judge.

However, it’s important to avoid simplistic interpretations. The Court did not eliminate the crime nor remove the legal limit, and the five-gram threshold remains in the General Health Law as a regulatory reference.

What changed is the method of analysis: now, exceeding that threshold is no longer enough to assume trafficking or sale without examining the specific context.

The end of the ‘dictatorship of the scale’
The ruling stems from a legal action filed by a homeless person detained with a quantity exceeding the legal limit, which led the court to review the automatic use of weight as a criminal criterion. In this context, the Court questioned the use of exceeding the weight threshold to define criminalization without considering fundamental rights.

“This violates fundamental rights such as the free development of personality, privacy, and individual health, without protecting a relevant legal interest, since personal consumption does not affect third parties or public health,” the Supreme Court ruling stated.

What judges and police must now analyze
The new criterion requires abandoning the mechanical reading of weight and adopting a comprehensive evaluation of the case. Authorities must consider objective factors (such as time, place, manner of arrest, or quantity of the substance as evidence and not as the sole proof) and subjective factors (personal conditions, possible drug dependence, and the cultural, social, or professional context of the accused).

The intention, according to the spirit of the ruling, is to prevent users or people in vulnerable situations from being prosecuted as traffickers simply for possessing an amount exceeding the recommended limit.

A divided Court
It should be noted that this ruling was not unanimous. The Supreme Court came within one vote of declaring the five-gram limit unconstitutional across the board, but ultimately granted an injunction only in the specific case of a homeless person arrested with 14.26 grams, according to La Jornada.

During the debate, Chief Justice Hugo Aguilar Ortiz posed a question that leaves the discussion open for future debate: “The question that arises is: once the five-gram limit is exceeded, how much could be considered personal use? I believe this is an issue that still needs to be deliberated. But, in this specific case, with the available evidence, there is no indication that the person was involved in drug dealing; in fact, no small bags or evidence of sales were found on him.”

The draft ruling also maintained that the exclusion of criminal liability should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to avoid criminalizing people with drug dependencies, without eliminating the crime of possession.

In contrast, some dissenting votes warned that the quantity parameter remains necessary to avoid judicial discretion and protect third parties, noting that “the free development of personality is not an absolute right.”

It’s not total decriminalization (and why it’s important to understand this well)
Although the precedent marks a significant shift, cannabis possession remains a crime under Mexican law, and drug trafficking continues to be prosecuted. The five-gram threshold remains in effect as a regulatory reference, but it no longer functions as an automatic trigger for sanctions.

In practice, this reconfigures police and judicial work: weight ceases to be a rigid boundary between consumption and crime, and becomes just one of several elements to be evaluated.

The change neither legalizes nor decriminalizes.

https://elplanteo.com/5g-cannabis-delito-mexico-corte-suprema/?utm_campaign=ICW&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=128512239&utm_content=128512239&utm_source=hs_email