At present, we are facing a diverse form of integration of Mexican jurisprudence, this, as a result of the implementation of the Eleventh Epoch of the Judicial Weekly of the Federation, therefore, this article aims to address whether or not there is responsibility on the part of Federal Judges as a social claim for not complying with the determinations issued by their hierarchical superiors in confrontation with judicial independence. Now, the judicial reform that concerns us, was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on the eleventh of March of two thousand and twenty-one, and from the first of May following, began the Eleventh Epoch of the Judicial Weekly of the Federation, in which, the way of constituting a precedent that is mandatory following the system of hierarchies for a certain territory is restructured, or, where appropriate, the entire country, which is why it is considered to constitute a transcendent change, in order to move to the system of jurisprudence by reiteration of criteria to precedents, which refers to the US system. Historically, the function of jurisprudence has laid the foundations for the conduct of judicial bodies, that is, they are guiding criteria that resolve certain circumstances, which although they have already been discussed in advance of the case that is resolved or that in a similar way may constitute an idea of the way in which the new case should be adjudicated; However, in a generic way, at least five previous cases had to be specified so that the theses issued reached the rank of jurisprudence and therefore, their obligatory nature was constrained, which could occur in a short or indeterminate period of time. According to Minister President Arturo Zaldívar, it constitutes the most important constitutional reform of the last quarter of a century, specifically with respect to the jurisprudential system, since it implies a structural change and that seeks significant effectiveness to urge self-criticism, in what interests it states: "Modification to the system of jurisprudence, to strengthen the precedents of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation. In order that the constitutional doctrine that frames the work of the rest of the jurisdictional bodies of the country." That assertion is supported by the fact that the case-law was limited to the creation of theses by contradiction or by repetition; The reform proposes that the Supreme Court, when analyzing an issue and the vote is qualified, be understood to have generated a mandatory precedent, which is why the population can demand its observance immediately and the criteria be used by anyone who goes to trial without the need to join five criteria in that regard, which makes its creation more flexible and therefore its application. For this reason, it is understood that a criterion that becomes mandatory comes into force once it is published in the Judicial Weekly of the Federation.