Argentina · Politics
Key Facts
- —The ruling On Friday, 14 August 2026, the court struck down one article of emergency decree 274/2019 as unconstitutional.
- —The reason Only Congress can decide which courts hear which cases, so a president cannot change that by decree.
- —The vote It was unanimous, signed by the three sitting justices: Horacio Rosatti, Carlos Rosenkrantz and Ricardo Lorenzetti.
- —The standard Emergency decrees are valid only in a real crisis, and this one gave no reason for the change.
- —The Milei angle His 2023 mega-decree still stands, but the judges signaled tighter review of decrees ahead.
The case turned on an old decree from Mauricio Macri, yet the warning lands squarely on Javier Milei.
Argentina’s Supreme Court has drawn a clearer line around how far a president can govern by decree. On Friday, 14 August 2026.
The judges struck down part of an emergency decree and reminded the government that some powers belong to Congress alone. The decision was narrow, but its message reached straight into President Javier Milei’s playbook.
What the Supreme Court actually ruled
The court did not abolish emergency decrees, and it is important to say so plainly. It declared just one article of a single decree unconstitutional.
That article had shifted which federal courts review certain penalties. The judges said a president has no power to make that change on his own.
The decree at the center of the case
The decree in question is number 274/2019, on fair-competition and consumer rules. It was signed by a previous president, Mauricio Macri, not by Milei.
The dispute itself was small. It grew from a fine of about 700,000 pesos (about US$470 at 1,490 per US dollar, 14 Aug 2026) against Cencosud.
Why the judges said no
The constitution gives Congress the exclusive job of deciding which courts handle which matters. The president cannot rewrite those rules through a decree.
The judges also noted the decree offered no emergency to justify the change. In their words, not a single line explained why the step was urgent.
This was Macri’s decree, not Milei’s
The point deserves emphasis, because the headline story is easy to overstate. The court struck down a decree from the Macri years, so no Milei measure was cancelled here.
Still, the reasoning applies to every president equally. That is why the ruling is read as a warning to the current government.
What it means for Milei’s rule by decree
Milei has governed heavily through these emergency decrees, known locally as DNUs. He turned to them because he lacks a majority in Congress.
The court has now said the tool is exceptional, not a shortcut for ordinary lawmaking. As a result, future decrees face a stricter test when they reach the judges.
The mega-decree that still stands
Milei‘s biggest single act was decree 70/2023, a sweeping package signed days after he took office. It changed dozens of laws at once.
That decree remains largely in force today. Courts have suspended some chapters, yet its core survives, because broad challenges were rejected for lack of a concrete case.
How emergency decrees are supposed to work
A decree of necessity and urgency lets a president act with the force of law between sessions of Congress. It is meant for genuine emergencies only.
The constitution bars decrees on tax, criminal, electoral and party matters outright. Congress can also reject any decree, though it stays in effect until both chambers vote it down.
A pattern of pushback from the courts
This ruling did not appear out of nowhere. Over recent years, judges have struck down or suspended a string of decrees from several presidents.
Lower courts have already blocked parts of Milei’s decrees, from labor rules to a migration measure. So the latest decision fits a wider trend of judicial caution.
What to watch next
The real test comes when a Milei decree reaches the Supreme Court in a concrete lawsuit. Then the judges will apply the same strict standard they set out here.
For now, the president keeps his decree powers, yet the fence around them is higher. Whether that changes how he governs is the open question.
Frequently Asked Questions
Did the Supreme Court ban emergency decrees in Argentina?
No. The Supreme Court struck down one article of a single decree and reaffirmed strict limits. But presidents can still issue emergency decrees in a genuine crisis.
Which decree did the ruling concern?
It concerned decree 274/2019 on fair-competition rules, signed by former president Mauricio Macri. The judges voided only the part that changed which courts review certain penalties.
How does this affect President Milei?
No Milei decree was cancelled. Still, the ruling warns that his frequent decrees face tighter review, because the court called the tool exceptional rather than routine.
Is Milei’s 2023 mega-decree still in force?
Yes, decree 70/2023 remains largely in effect. Courts have suspended some chapters, but the core survives after broad challenges failed for lack of a concrete case.
Connected Coverage
- Milei’s reform package heads to Congress
- A Milei decree on expelling foreigners
Sources: La Nacion; El Destape; Minuto Uno.
This article was produced by The Rio Times’ automated AI newsroom. Editorial responsibility: Matthias Camenzind, Publisher and Editor-in-Chief. The Rio Times also runs Ask Rio Times, which answers from 100,000+ of our own articles, the daily Latin America Power Map, and prediction-market odds on elections and markets.. How we use AI · Report an error