Final Constitutional court ruling validates century-old citizenship principle while clarifying it does not address new restrictions
In a landmark decision that provides crucial legal validation for Italian citizenship by descent, Italy’s Constitutional Court has decisively rejected challenges to the historical jure sanguinis system. On July 31, 2025, the court issued Ruling No. 142, dismissing constitutional challenges brought by courts in Bologna, Rome, Milan, and Florence that questioned the automatic recognition of Italian citizenship for foreign-born descendants of Italian citizens.
This decision represents a significant victory for Italian dual citizenship advocates, as it establishes the constitutional legitimacy of Italy’s century-old citizenship by descent principles.
However, it’s important to underline that this ruling addresses only the 1992 Italian citizenship law and does not concern the controversial new restrictions introduced by Law 74/2025 (the Tajani Decree), which remain subject to separate constitutional review.
The Constitutional Challenge to Historical Citizenship Law
The cases before the Constitutional Court involved various questions of constitutional legitimacy raised by the Courts of Bologna, Rome, Milan, and Florence regarding Article 1 of Law No. 91 of 1992, insofar as it does not provide for any limit on the acquisition of citizenship by descent when establishing that a citizen by birth includes “the child of a father or mother who are citizens.”
Judges of the mentioned courts had questioned the automatic recognition of citizenship to individuals born and living abroad who lack substantial ties to Italy, arguing that this practice violated key constitutional principles. The referring courts specifically challenged whether unlimited citizenship by descent was compatible with:
- Article 1 of the Constitution (concerning the notion of “sovereign people”)
- Article 3 (principles of equality and reasonableness)
- Article 117 (compliance with EU law and international obligations)
Constitutional Court’s Decisive Response
The Constitutional Court firmly rejected these challenges, establishing several crucial precedents:
Legislative Discretion in Citizenship Matters
The court emphasized that the legislature enjoys “a particularly wide margin of discretion” in identifying the prerequisites for acquiring citizenship, while the Court’s role is to verify that citizenship acquisition norms do not use criteria entirely foreign to constitutional principles or that conflict with them.
The justices clarified that the Constitutional Court is prevented from intervening to limit the acquisition of citizenship by descent by means of a ruling that would entail making choices, among many possible options, characterised by a wide margin of discretion and which would have significant implications on the legal order.
Validation of Blood-Based Citizenship Principle
Crucially, the Court noted that the referring judges from the lower courts did not contest, in general, the suitability of the filiation bond (i.e., blood ties or the parent-to-child bond) to justify the acquisition of citizenship. This represents a clear constitutional validation of the blood-based citizenship principle that has governed Italian law for over 100 years, reaffirming the right of Italian citizens abroad to transmit nationality to their descendants.
Historical Precedent and Legal Continuity
The Constitutional Court dismissed these objections as unfounded, emphasizing that citizenship legislation falls within the discretionary domain of the legislature. The Court highlighted the longstanding inclusive approach adopted by the Italian government towards descendants of Italian emigrants, tracing back to legal traditions established as early as 1865.
This historical context is particularly significant, as it demonstrates the Constitutional Court’s recognition of Italy’s century-old commitment to maintaining citizenship connections with emigrant communities worldwide through blood-based transmission.
Critical Distinction: Historical vs. New Law
A crucial aspect of this ruling is its limited scope. The Constitutional Court was called to rule on the constitutionality of the regulations prior to Law 74/2025; this decision does not concern Law 74 itself, on which further rulings are still awaited.
The Court also rejected requests from the parties involved to rule on the new law. The Court clarified that the underlying questions here are unrelated.
This distinction is vital for understanding the ruling’s implications:
- Validated: The historical jure sanguinis system based on unlimited descent
- Not Addressed: The new restrictions imposed by the Tajani Decree
- Still Pending: Constitutional challenges to Law 74/2025 remain under separate review
Legal Implications and Strategic Significance
Constitutional Legitimacy Established
The ruling establishes several important legal principles:
- Blood-based citizenship is constitutionally sound: The filiation principle as a basis for citizenship acquisition has explicit constitutional validation
- Legislative authority confirmed: Citizenship policy falls within parliamentary discretion, not judicial intervention.
- Historical continuity recognized: The court acknowledged the “longstanding inclusive approach” dating to 1865.
European and International Law Compliance
The objections concerning Articles 1, 3, and 117, first paragraph, of the Italian Constitution, the latter in relation to the constraints imposed by European Union law, were deemed inadmissible. Similarly, the question raised on Article 117, first paragraph, of the Italian Constitution, in relation to international obligations, was deemed inadmissible, as the referring courts had not identified which international rule had been violated.
This finding is particularly significant as it demonstrates that the Constitutional Court found no conflict between unlimited jure sanguinis and either EU law or international obligations.
Impact on Ongoing Italian Citizenship Cases
While the ruling doesn’t directly affect cases under the new Law 74/2025, it provides important context for ongoing constitutional challenges to the Tajani Decree. The validation of historical jure sanguinis principles strengthens arguments that any restrictions must meet high constitutional standards.
Applicants working through an Italian consulate or legal counsel abroad may now rely on this decision to reinforce their claims under the older Italian citizenship law, particularly in cases where consular authorities question historical lineage or continuity.
Italian Legal Commentary and Analysis
Italian legal scholars have noted the significance of this ruling in several key publications:
Legal analyst Roberta Cavallaro noted that “the ruling fits into the always current debate on the attribution of Italian citizenship by descent (iure sanguinis), reaffirming a crucial principle of our legal system: the clear distinction between legislative function and constitutional review.”
The decision also references recent Court of Cassation rulings (Cass. n. 25317 and 25318 of 2022) that emphasized how the iure sanguinis criterion is “intimately linked to Italian history and to the specific, constant and century-old choice of the Italian legislature to maintain (through blood ties) the relationship” with Italian citizens worldwide.
Broader Context: Separation of Powers
The Constitutional Court’s approach reflects fundamental principles of democratic governance and separation of powers. The court “avoided entering into the merit of a question that requires political and systematic evaluation. It thus reaffirmed, with clarity and firmness, that the right to citizenship is the primary matter of the legislature and that its task is only to verify compliance with the constitutional charter, without substituting itself for the former.”
This position leaves the door open for future legislative reform while firmly establishing that such changes must come through democratic processes rather than judicial intervention.
A Landmark Moment for Italian Dual Citizenship and Constitutional Rights
For descendants applying for recognition today, this decision reinforces that being recognized as an Italian citizen remains a legitimate constitutional right under historical law. The ruling also reassures applicants dealing with their Italian consulate that the long-standing jure sanguinis principle continues to protect the transmission of nationality by blood. As the Italian government proceeds with further reviews of Law 74/2025, the foundations of Italian dual citizenship remain constitutionally valid and deeply rooted in Italy’s legal tradition.
Victory for Citizenship Rights
The Constitutional Court’s Ruling No. 142 represents a decisive victory for Italian citizenship by descent advocates. By validating the constitutional legitimacy of unlimited jure sanguinis and recognizing its historical importance to Italian legal tradition, the court has provided crucial legal foundation for citizenship rights.
While the ruling does not directly address current restrictions under Law 74/2025, it establishes that any limitations on citizenship by descent must meet high constitutional standards and cannot arbitrarily eliminate rights that have been constitutionally validated for over a century.
For the thousands of Italian citizens and descendants worldwide, this decision confirms that their citizenship claims based on blood ties have deep constitutional legitimacy rooted in Italian legal tradition. As ongoing challenges to the Tajani Decree continue through the courts, this ruling provides important precedent support for arguments that Italian dual citizenship represents a fundamental aspect of Italian constitutional law that cannot be easily restricted or eliminated.
This article is based on analysis from the Constitutional Court Ruling No. 142/2025, official court communications, and legal commentary from Mazzeschi Legal Counsels, PRO2-EUCITI, and Rivista Cammino Diritto.