Canonist Ed Peter takes a look at Mitus Iudex, and doesn't see a lot of major changes BUT there are a few!
He then takes a second look, and doesn't like everything he sees:
At the pope’s request, a tiny group of experts, most from just one
country, developed these new canons and explanations in a very short
time. I find, however, the implications of some of these norms for
marriage law in general, and for diocesan bishops in particular,
stunning, and I join Dr. Kurt Martens of CUA in wondering how Bishops must feel at having such significant burdens thrust on them just in time for
Christmas with, as far as one can see, virtually no prior consultation. I expressly cautioned against this approach last year and sound that claxon again. Assuming, in any event, that I
have read the new norms correctly, and assuming that there are no easy
resolutions to my concerns, what might one suggest?
First, and most importantly, the vacatio legis (a delay period before new laws go into effect per Canon 8) indicated for Mitis
should be extended from this December until well into next year at the
very least. If, as some assert, Francis’ annulment reforms are the most
significant in the last three hundred years, a considerably longer period than three months is needed to prepare for them. If necessary, a request for an extension could be proposed by the upcoming Synod of Bishops.
Second, a much wider consultation about annulment reform should be conducted, a consultation that would involve, at a minimum, many identified diocesan bishops (identified precisely so observers could forward remarks to them) and canonists from several countries, especially from countries with extensive tribunal operational experience.