The government’s decision to try José de León Toral provoked suspicion in many sectors. The previous summary executions of Catholic activists, a Catholic newspaper noted, “contrast[ed] sarcastically with the legalist meticulousness of which Calles and his friends continually boast.”1 Precisely because of such views, authorities had abundant reasons to air the case, and as publicly as possible. Two years into a Catholic rebellion and in the final month of his term, President Plutarco Elías Calles found in the trial the opportunity to show that, under his guidance, the revolution had yielded a nation of laws and not a godless tyranny. Since assuming the presidency in 1924, Calles claimed that his administration had embarked on the “governmental phase of the Revolution.” He had transformed a “government of caudillos” into “nation of institutions.”2 The trial of José de León Toral and his codefendant, Concepción Acevedo de la Llata, was to be proof. The trial had to be exemplary. The defendants had access to a skilled defense team. The Catholic activists summoned as witnesses were able to speak freely before citizen jurors. Local and international journalists produced verbatim, front-page coverage, cameras filmed the proceedings, and radio transmitters broadcasted them live.3 This model of transparency and due process would showcase the bureaucratic rationality of the secular state. It would also demonstrate that the violence inflicted by the state was justified and legitimate.4