The controversial Tajani Decree faces its first major legal challenge as a Turin court refers constitutional questions to Italy’s highest court.
In a landmark decision that could reshape the future of Italian citizenship by descent (jure sanguinis), the Court of Turin has formally challenged the constitutionality of the controversial new Italian law on citizenship.. On June 25, 2025, Judge Fabrizio Alessandria accepted a motion questioning Law 74/2025 – the converted version of the infamous “Tajani Decree” – and referred the matter to Italy’s Constitutional Court.
This development marks the first serious judicial pushback against legislation that has thrown thousands of future Italian citizens and descendants worldwide into legal uncertainty. The court’s decision to forward constitutional questions rather than dismiss them outright signals potential vulnerabilities in the new law that could lead to its partial or complete invalidation.
The Contested Italian Citizenship Law: What Changed Under Law 74/2025
Law 74/2025, which converted the original Decree-Law 36/2025 (commonly known as the Tajani Decree), fundamentally altered Italy’s approach to Italian citizenship by descent. The legislation introduced several key restrictions:
- Generational Limits: Citizenship recognition is now generally limited to descendants within two generations of an Italy-born ancestor.
- Retroactive Application: The law applies retroactively to all cases, stating that individuals born before its enactment are “considered to have never acquired Italian citizenship” if they don’t meet the new criteria.
- Cut-off Date: A March 27, 2025 deadline was established for filing applications under the old rules – a deadline that had already passed when the law was enacted.
The Turin court case emerged from an application process filed by Venezuelan nationals of Italian ancestry on March 28, 2025 – one day after the new law took effect. This timing proved crucial, as it highlighted the law’s retroactive nature and its impact on individuals who would have qualified under previous regulations.
Constitutional Grounds for Challenge
The legal challenge, brought by the Association of the Righteous Iure Sanguinis (AGIS) together with Avvocati Uniti per la Cittadinanza Italiana (AUCI), raises several constitutional concerns:
Violation of Fundamental Rights
The motion argues that Law 74/2025 violates multiple provisions of the Italian Constitution:
- Articles 2 and 3: The principle of reasonableness and legitimate expectation, as the law creates “absolutely arbitrary” distinctions based on unforeseeable temporal criteria.
- Article 117: Compliance with international obligations, given Italy’s commitments under various international treaties.
International Treaty Violations
The challenge specifically cites incompatibility with several international agreements:
- Article 9 of the Treaty on European Union
- Article 20 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)
- Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (protection against arbitrary deprivation of nationality)
- Article 3 of the Fourth Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights
The European Union Law Dimension
Perhaps the most innovative aspect of the Turin court’s analysis is its emphasis on European Union law implications. This approach represents a strategic shift that could prove decisive in challenging the legislation.
EU Citizenship as Protected Status
The court’s reasoning follows a clear legal logic:
- Automatic EU Citizenship: Italian citizens automatically acquire EU citizenship status under Article 20 of the TFEU.
- Protected Rights: EU citizenship carries fundamental rights including freedom of movement and political participation.
- Proportionality Requirement: Any national law affecting EU citizenship must comply with EU principles, particularly proportionality.
CJEU Precedent: The Proportionality Test
The Turin ordinance explicitly references recent European Court of Justice (CJEU) jurisprudence, particularly the September 5, 2023 judgment in Case C-689/21 (X v. Denmark). This ruling established that loss of Member State citizenship – which entails loss of EU citizenship – must respect the proportionality principle.
According to CJEU precedent, a national measure is proportionate only if it includes:
- Individual Assessment: Authorities must evaluate consequences for each affected person.
- Adequate Notice: Individuals must receive timely warning of potential citizenship loss.
- Reasonable Time to Act: A reasonable period must be granted to submit retention or recovery applications.
The Tajani Decree fails all three tests: it imposes automatic mass loss without individual assessment, provides no advance warning, and sets an impossible retroactive deadline. The Italian government may therefore need to reconsider how it enforces these provisions to remain aligned with EU obligations.
The “Living Law” Principle Under Attack
The constitutional challenge also defends the established legal doctrine of “living law” (diritto vivente) regarding Italian citizenship by descent. For decades, Italy’s highest courts, including the Court of Cassation, have consistently ruled that:
- Citizenship as Personal Status: Jure sanguinis citizenship is an “essential quality of the person” with characteristics of “absoluteness, originality, inalienability, and imprescriptibility”.
- Acquisition by Original Title: Individuals born to Italian parents acquire citizenship automatically at birth; subsequent procedures merely “declare” rather than “create” this status.
- Irrelevance of Formal Recognition: The lack of formal recognition doesn’t affect the underlying right to citizenship.
As legal expert Michele Vitale notes, “those born abroad to an Italian ancestor were Italian citizens ab origine. The fact that they had, or had not, taken legal action for the ‘formal’ recognition of their status was a simple matter of fact, irrelevant for the purposes of the recognition of the right.”
Strategic Implications and Limitations
While the Turin court’s referral represents a significant victory for citizenship advocates, legal experts caution that the challenge has specific limitations:
What the Challenge Addresses
The constitutional question focuses specifically on:
- The retroactive application of new restrictions
- The March 27, 2025 deadline provisions
- The automatic loss of citizenship without individual assessment
What Remains Unaddressed
The referral deliberately avoids other controversial aspects of Law 74/2025:
- New “exclusivity” requirements for Italian dual citizenship
- Complex issues affecting minor children of naturalized parents
- Complications for pre-1912 citizenship lines
As noted by citizenship law observers, “winning the battle over retroactivity is the first and most important step, but it is not the only one.”
International Response and Support
The legal challenge has garnered support from citizenship advocacy organizations worldwide. The collaboration between AGIS and AUCI demonstrates the coordinated effort to contest the legislation through multiple legal avenues.
According to AGIS, the result is “of extraordinary importance” and was achieved in “very quick” time, reflecting effective collaboration between legal entities representing Italian citizens and descendants globally.
Next Steps and Timeline
With the constitutional questions now formally before Italy’s Constitutional Court, the legal process enters a critical phase:
- Case Suspension: The original Turin proceedings are suspended pending the Constitutional Court’s decision
- Parallel Cases: Other similar cases filed after the new legislation may also be suspended awaiting the ruling
- Constitutional Court Deliberation: The court will decide whether Law 74/2025 violates constitutional principles and EU law
- Potential Outcomes: If found unconstitutional, the problematic provisions could be struck down entirely
Broader Implications for EU Citizens
The Turin court’s emphasis on EU citizenship protection could have implications beyond Italian citizenship law. If successful, this approach might establish precedents for challenging other national citizenship laws that affect EU citizenship rights without adequate safeguards.
The case represents a test of whether EU law can effectively constrain national sovereignty in citizenship matters when fundamental rights are at stake. As legal observers note, “if the Constitutional Court finds the issue well-founded, the new provision will be declared unconstitutional and thus will be ‘cancelled’ from our legal system.”
For individuals pursuing Italian dual citizenship through ancestry, the outcome of this case will directly affect how applications are reviewed at each Italian consulate and within the national application process. The Italian government is expected to clarify the procedures for recognizing Italian ancestry once the Constitutional Court issues its ruling, offering long-awaited certainty for descendants seeking to confirm their status as Italian citizens.
A Paradigm Shift in Citizenship Defense
The Turin court’s constitutional referral represents more than just another legal challenge – it signals a fundamental shift in how citizenship rights are defended in the European context. By framing Italian dual citizenship restrictions as EU law violations, advocates have opened a new front in the battle for recognition rights.
This European dimension transforms what began as a national legislative dispute into a question of fundamental EU rights and legal certainty. The Constitutional Court’s eventual decision will not only determine the fate of Law 74/2025 but also establish important precedents for protecting acquired citizenship rights across the European Union.
For the thousands of Italian citizens and descendants affected by these restrictions, the Turin court’s decision offers hope that judicial review can provide protection against retroactive legislation that undermines established rights. The coming months will reveal whether Italy’s Constitutional Court will uphold these principles and strike down provisions that violate both national constitutional law and European Union legal standards.
This article is based on analysis from multiple legal sources including ItalyGet, Italianismo, and Mazzeschi Legal Counsels. For the latest developments in this ongoing legal challenge, readers are encouraged to monitor official court announcements and consult qualified legal counsel.