After almost two years of waiting, a man managed to marry two women in the state of Puebla, which has caused controversy in Mexico because this type of marriage is not recognized by law.
This was possible since the subject filed an Amparo on December 22, 2020, which was admitted by the Eighth District Judge in matters of Civil, Administrative, and Labor Amparo and Federal Trials, Pedro Arroyo Soto on July 20.
The Amparo was filed under the argument that it would be discriminatory to deny the petition after the complainant had established that “his sexual orientation is polyamory.”
This consists, according to the explanation of the judge, in those relationships made up of more than two people simultaneously.
“Normally, there is a type of indirect discrimination, which occurs when the rules and practices are apparently neutral, but the result of their content or application translates into disproportionate treatment of people or groups from a different situation given their sexual orientation, known as polyamory.”, he pointed out in the sentence.
This Amparo protects those involved from articles 294 and 297 of the Civil Code of the state in which it is specified that marriage and concubinage are made up of two people, which the judge considered contravenes the first article of the Constitution.
Since it recognizes that no person will be discriminated against for reasons of ethnicity, religion, gender, age, disabilities, social or health status, opinions, marital status, and sexual preferences, as was the case in this legal filing.
Therefore, it is “considered that the challenged articles are unconstitutional because they contain a description that tacitly and unjustifiably excludes relationships between several people of the same or different sex, from access to marriage and cohabitation.”
“The foregoing allows us to conclude that in the standards claimed, the legislator of the state of Puebla violates the principles of equality and non-discrimination to the detriment of the complainant”
This measure was only granted to the people who filed the protection, so not everyone will be able to do the same, although it could open a door for this type of union.
