The Constitutional Court has delivered an initial response to the legitimacy questions brought forward by the Court of Turin regarding the recent changes to the criteria governing the recognition of Italian citizenship through family lineage.
A press release issued on March 12, 2026 — anticipating a ruling not yet formally deposited — announced that the Court found some of the questions without merit and others procedurally inadmissible, marking a significant moment in the legal dispute surrounding the provisions enacted in 2025.
The Legislative Background and the Referral to the Court
The matter originates from amendments made in 2025 to the legal framework regulating Italian citizenship, most notably through the addition of Article 3-bis to Law No. 91 of 1992. This provision, introduced by Decree-Law No. 36/2025 and later converted into Law No. 74/2025, reshaped the conditions for recognizing citizenship through bloodline, imposing tighter restrictions and generating effects that extended even to individuals born abroad prior to the provision coming into force.
During proceedings initiated by individuals of Italian origin living outside the country, the Court of Turin concluded that certain features of the new rules might conflict with constitutional and supranational principles. The Turin judges expressed particular concern over the legitimacy of drawing a distinction between applications for citizenship recognition submitted before and after March 28, 2025, as well as over the potential infringement of rights that had already been established. On these grounds, the judge suspended the proceedings and referred the questions to the Constitutional Court for an assessment of their compatibility with the fundamental principles of the legal order.
The Constitutional Court’s Analysis
In the press release published at the conclusion of the deliberations on March 11, 2026, the Constitutional Court found no merit in the objections raised by the Court of Turin with respect to Article 3 of the Constitution. In the Court’s view, there is no unreasonableness in treating differently those who submitted a citizenship recognition request before March 28, 2025, and those who did so at a later date.
The Court also dismissed the argument that the contested legislation could be interpreted as an implicit and retroactive withdrawal of citizenship status. Similarly, the objection raised in connection with Article 9 of the Treaty on European Union and Article 20 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — provisions linking European citizenship to holding the nationality of a member state — was found to lack foundation.
Beyond the questions deemed without merit, the Court also declared certain further objections inadmissible, considering non-examinable the complaints concerning the alleged breach of Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 3 of the Fourth Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights.
An Initial Signal on the New Regulatory Framework
The ruling of the Constitutional Court represents the first judicial response to the new legislative structure on citizenship by descent, reshaped in 2025 with the aim of redefining the rules on the transmission of civic status and reducing the volume of potential applications originating from abroad.
Although the Court has not yet addressed every issue raised in the ongoing legal debate, the decision suggests that, at least with respect to the aspects examined, the reform does not appear to be at odds with the constitutional principles invoked by the Court of Turin. In this light, the Court has reaffirmed the legislature’s latitude in setting the criteria for the attribution of citizenship, provided that such choices are neither arbitrary nor in conflict with the foundational values of the legal order.
Potential Future Developments
The ruling of the Constitutional Court marks an important step in the evolving legal debate surrounding the citizenship reform. The findings of lack of merit and inadmissibility bring partial closure to the challenges raised by the Court of Turin, yet the interpretative discussion remains open and may be further shaped by other pending cases — the Court still has to rule on the legitimacy questions referred by the courts of Mantua and Campobasso.
Pending the filing of the full written reasoning — which will allow for deeper analysis and evaluation — the Court’s press release already offers an early indication of how the new legislative framework relates to constitutional principles, providing a reference point for ongoing proceedings and for the future application of the rules governing Italian citizenship.
