The short version
- The Supreme Court ruled against a previous injunction, enabling President Javier Milei’s administration to proceed with repealing restrictions on foreign land ownership.
- Activists and Indigenous groups argue the changes threaten environmental sovereignty and accelerate evictions in resource-rich regions like Patagonia.
- Legislative efforts have already seen some contentious provisions withdrawn, but a bill favoring private property rights remains pending in the lower house.
Argentina’s Supreme Court has overturned a prior ruling that blocked President Javier Milei’s attempt to repeal the 2011 Land Law, effectively removing a major legal obstacle to his deregulation agenda. This judicial decision arrives just two months after a similar legislative effort failed in Congress, signaling a renewed push by the administration to open resource-rich territories to international investment. The move has intensified political friction between the government’s economic strategy and civil society groups concerned about environmental protection and land rights.
The 2011 Land Law established limits on foreign ownership of rural property, capping holdings at 15% of any single department and 30% for any single nationality. Critics of the current administration argue that these protections are already weakened by their non-retroactive nature, allowing existing violations to persist. In regions like Lácar in Neuquén province, foreign entities own approximately 54% of the land, far exceeding statutory limits. A small number of U.S.-based companies control vast tracts in this area, holding fourteen times more land than the local Curruhuinca Mapuche community, which has long sought access to clean water.
Protests erupted across the country following the court’s decision, with demonstrators gathering in cities such as Esquel in Chubut province. Marta Sahores, an 84-year-old chemistry professor and activist, joined workers, students, and Indigenous organizations in what they termed a “march of anger.” Participants carried signs declaring that land is not for sale and warning against the government’s perceived handover of natural resources to foreign investors. Sahores emphasized that foreign land purchases often include control over rivers and lakes, arguing that such transactions undermine environmental sovereignty and democratic principles.
The administration’s broader economic strategy includes the Large Investment Incentive Regime, enacted in 2024, which offers tax breaks, regulatory stability, and relaxed capital repatriation rules for foreign investors. A proposed expansion, dubbed “super Rigi,” aims to attract mega-projects such as artificial intelligence data centers and semiconductor manufacturing facilities. These industries require significant amounts of water and critical minerals, including lithium, of which Argentina holds some of the world’s largest reserves. The government views these incentives as essential for attracting billionaire investors like Peter Thiel, who recently acquired a stake in an oil producer operating in the Vaca Muerta shale formation.
Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling, legislative progress has been uneven. In August, Milei’s party, La Libertad Avanza, passed a modified version of its private property inviolability bill in the Senate. The final text removed two controversial provisions: one that would have raised the foreign land ownership cap from 15% to 25%, and another designed to fast-track development projects following wildfires. However, the approved legislation still includes measures to expedite evictions and make it more difficult for the state to expropriate land for public works, prioritizing private interests over communal or public needs. The bill now awaits consideration in the Chamber of Deputies.
Academics and researchers warn that the deregulation push is already having tangible effects on vulnerable populations. Pablo Volkind, a professor at the University of Buenos Aires’ School of Economic Sciences, noted that the policy shift has led to a surge in eviction orders in provinces such as Jujuy, Neuquén, Chubut, and Misiones. Courts appear to be moving more quickly on property disputes that might have faced greater scrutiny under previous administrations. Volkind heads the Land Observatory, which created an interactive map showing how foreign land holdings overlap with natural reserves, national parks, glaciers, and Indigenous territories.
The concentration of foreign ownership in ecologically sensitive areas raises concerns about long-term environmental impacts. Many of the lands exceeding legal caps are located along critical watersheds and near protected zones. Activists argue that the removal of safeguards will deepen extractive practices, exacerbate housing inequality, and displace Indigenous communities who have lived on these lands for generations. The Land Observatory’s data highlights the extent to which foreign entities control resources in regions known for their glacial lakes and native forests, underscoring the tension between economic liberalization and conservation efforts.
As the debate continues, civil society groups remain active in both street protests and legal challenges. Sahores and other activists assert that they are prepared to fight the reforms through multiple avenues, emphasizing their commitment to defending real democracy and environmental integrity. The outcome of the pending legislation in the Chamber of Deputies will likely determine the extent to which Milei’s deregulation agenda can be fully implemented. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court’s decision has set a precedent that may influence future disputes over land rights and foreign investment in Argentina.
The situation reflects broader global tensions between economic development driven by foreign capital and local efforts to preserve natural resources and community rights. In Argentina, these dynamics are particularly acute due to the country’s rich mineral deposits and agricultural potential. The government’s strategy relies on attracting high-value investments to stimulate growth, while critics contend that this approach sacrifices long-term sustainability for short-term gains. The coming months will reveal whether legislative compromises or continued judicial interventions can mitigate the impacts of these sweeping policy changes.
Observers note that the rapid pace of legal and legislative shifts has left many communities uncertain about their future security. Indigenous groups, in particular, face immediate threats from eviction orders tied to longstanding land disputes. The combination of relaxed regulations, favorable court rulings, and aggressive investment incentives creates a complex landscape where property rights are being redefined. As protests persist and legal battles unfold, the balance between economic openness and social equity remains a central question in Argentine politics.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- The Guardian US↗‘They take our water, our soil’: protesters fight ‘foreignisation’ as Javier Milei encourages land sales in Argentina
