Judges should be chosen because they're the best, not because they're friends
En Buenos Aires, la aprobación senatorial de setenta y cuatro designaciones judiciales desató una disputa que va más allá de los nombres en juego: revela la tensión permanente entre los poderes del Estado y la pregunta de si la independencia judicial es un principio o una conveniencia. Mauricio Macri, desde la vereda opuesta, le recordó a Javier Milei que las instituciones no se sostienen con voluntad política sino con respeto a sus propias reglas. El caso de la jueza Michelli, cuya nominación el gobierno intentó retirar sin éxito, se convirtió en un espejo donde Argentina observa qué clase de república quiere ser.
- El Senado aprobó la designación de la jueza Michelli a pesar del intento del gobierno de retirar su candidatura en el último momento, dejando al Ejecutivo en una posición de derrota pública.
- La controversia gira en torno a un vínculo familiar entre Michelli y el periodista Hugo Alconada Mon, argumento que el gobierno usó para justificar su oposición pero que el Senado no consideró suficiente.
- Macri aprovechó la apertura para lanzar un desafío directo a Milei: firmar el decreto de nombramiento y aceptar el resultado legislativo, enmarcando la cuestión como una prueba de respeto constitucional.
- El gobierno evalúa una salida silenciosa: congelar indefinidamente el decreto presidencial aprovechando que la Cámara Federal donde Michelli debe servir aún no fue formalmente activada.
- La maniobra dilatoria, si se concreta, se produciría bajo la mirada de medios, organizaciones civiles y figuras políticas de peso, con el riesgo de una eventual intervención judicial que obligue a actuar.
El Senado argentino apenas había cerrado la sesión en que aprobó setenta y cuatro designaciones judiciales cuando la verdadera disputa tomó forma. Entre los nombres aprobados estaba el de María Verónica Michelli, una jueza cuya nominación el gobierno de Milei había intentado retirar en el último momento alegando su vínculo familiar con el periodista Hugo Alconada Mon. El intento fracasó. El Senado votó de todas formas, y Michelli quedó confirmada junto a decenas de otros candidatos.
Desde ese escenario, Mauricio Macri eligió intervenir. En un acto en la legislatura porteña, el expresidente lanzó un desafío velado pero inequívoco: supuso, con una sonrisa que decía más de lo que ocultaba, que Milei firmaría el decreto de nombramiento. El mensaje de fondo era más serio: los jueces deben elegirse por mérito, no por afinidades personales, y la independencia entre poderes no es negociable. Sin ella, sostuvo, no hay confianza institucional, ni inversión, ni Estado de derecho posible.
Pero el gobierno conservaba un recurso. La Cámara Federal de La Plata donde Michelli debería ejercer aún no había sido formalmente activada por el propio Poder Judicial. Eso abría la posibilidad de postergar indefinidamente el decreto presidencial sin necesidad de un rechazo explícito: una dilación burocrática, silenciosa, que evitara una nueva confrontación directa.
El problema es que esa maniobra ya no podría pasar inadvertida. El caso había atraído la atención de medios, organizaciones de la sociedad civil y ahora del propio Macri, cuya voz tiene peso en el establishment político argentino. Bloquear el nombramiento por vía procedimental, después de haber perdido la votación, sería exactamente eso: bloquear el nombramiento después de haber perdido la votación. El desafío de Macri era en realidad una advertencia: firmar, respetar la decisión del Senado y seguir adelante. Lo que Milei decida hacer a continuación dirá mucho sobre cómo entiende el ejercicio del poder.
The Senate chamber in Buenos Aires had barely settled after approving seventy-four judicial appointments when the real fight began. María Verónica Michelli, the judge at the center of the week's political turbulence, had cleared the chamber's vote despite the government's last-minute attempt to pull her nomination. By Thursday, it was done. The Milei administration had tried and failed to stop her.
But Mauricio Macri, watching from across the political divide, saw an opening. The former president appeared at an event in the city legislature and offered a pointed challenge to his successor. He supposed—with a smile that suggested he knew better—that Milei would actually sign the appointment. The words were light, but the implication was sharp: the government had lost the vote and now had to live with the result.
Macri's real message went deeper. Judges, he said, should be chosen because they were the best available, not because they were friends of the president. Independence between branches of government was not optional—it was foundational. Respect for the Constitution, for property rights, for the rule of law itself: these were the things that built investor confidence, that created jobs, that made a country function. A judiciary that answered to the executive was a judiciary that could not do its job.
The tension had been building all week. Michelli's nomination had become controversial because of a family connection: she was related to Hugo Alconada Mon, a prominent journalist. The Milei government had seized on this as grounds to withdraw her candidacy. But the Senate resisted. The chamber voted to approve her anyway, along with dozens of other judicial nominees. What had been framed as a routine process of filling vacancies became a test of whether the executive could simply reject the legislature's will.
Now came the waiting game. The government had lost the formal vote, but it still held a card. The tribunal where Michelli was supposed to serve—the Third Federal Chamber in La Plata—had not yet been formally activated by the judiciary itself. This created an opening: the Casa Rosada could simply freeze her appointment indefinitely, postponing the presidential decree that would make it official. No dramatic rejection, no second confrontation. Just bureaucratic delay.
But that maneuver carried its own cost. The case had drawn attention from media outlets, from civil society organizations focused on judicial matters, and now from Macri, whose criticism carried weight within Argentina's political establishment. If Milei chose to block the appointment through procedural means, he would be doing so in full public view, after losing the vote. The judiciary itself might eventually weigh in on whether such a delay was legitimate.
Macri's challenge was really a warning: sign the decree, respect the Senate's decision, and move on. Anything else would look like what it was—an attempt to overturn a legislative outcome through executive stubbornness. The former president had framed the issue in terms that transcended personalities or party loyalty. This was about how a country governed itself. And he was watching to see what Milei would do.
Citas Notables
We have to appoint the best judges and not be friends with any of them— Mauricio Macri
There must be respect for the independence of powers. If there is confidence, there are investments, and if there are investments, there is employment— Mauricio Macri
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why did the government try to withdraw Michelli's nomination in the first place? Was it really just about the family connection to the journalist?
That's what they said publicly, but it's worth asking what else might have been at stake. The nomination process had become a test of power—whether the executive could shape the judiciary according to its preferences. When the Senate resisted, it became about something larger than one judge.
And Macri's intervention—is he genuinely concerned about judicial independence, or is this political theater?
Probably both. Macri has always positioned himself as a defender of institutional rules, even when they inconvenience him. But he's also watching a rival president struggle with the same constraints that limited his own power. The message to Milei is: you lost this one, accept it.
What happens if the government just delays the appointment indefinitely? Can they actually do that?
Technically, yes—the tribunal hasn't been activated yet, so there's a legal argument for postponement. But it's a dangerous move. It looks like defying the Senate after losing the vote. And if the judiciary gets involved, it could become a constitutional crisis.
So Macri is essentially saying: don't go down this road?
Exactly. He's offering a way out that preserves Milei's dignity while respecting the democratic process. Sign the decree, claim victory on the broader judicial reform, move forward. The alternative is a prolonged fight that Milei has already lost.
And if Milei ignores the warning?
Then we'll see whether Argentina's institutions can actually constrain executive power, or whether they're just theater.