Is Law 74/2025 constitutional? What judgment 63/2026 held
The Constitutional Court left the 2025 reform standing: in judgment 63/2026 it declared the challenges to article 3-bis partly unfounded and partly inadmissible, so the generational limit and the cutoff remain in force. The case was heard on 11 March 2026, a press release followed on 12 March 2026, and the judgment itself was deposited on 30 April 2026, which is why you will see both dates reported as "the ruling".
What the Court did not do is more useful than what it did, and it is the part almost nobody publishes.
Declared unfounded
The challenge to article 3-bis, including the words extending it to people born before it came into force and conditions (a), (a-bis) and (b), brought under articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution and under article 117, first paragraph, in relation to the EU treaties.
Declared inadmissible
The question brought under article 117, first paragraph, as informed by article 15(2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 3(2) of Protocol 4 to the European Convention on Human Rights. Inadmissible means the Court did not reach the merits.
The reasoning that carried it
The Court found the temporal limitation not unreasonable, in part because applicants who had already submitted documentation or held a communicated appointment kept the protection of the earlier rules. In other words, the safety valves in conditions (a), (a-bis) and (b) are what made the cutoff survive.
The sentence that started a fight between two courts
In its reasoning the Court treated the position of an unrecognised descendant as something less than a settled status until recognition. Twelve days later, on 12 May 2026, the Court of Cassation deposited judgment 13818/2026 describing citizenship by descent as an absolute subjective right existing from birth, permanent and imprescriptible.
What the judgment did not settle
- The EU-law question. The Court disposed of the treaty-based challenge as framed by the Turin referrals; it did not rule that article 3-bis is compatible with EU citizenship for all purposes. On 23 July 2026 the same Court deposited order 147/2026 referring exactly that question to the EU Court of Justice, on referrals from Mantua and Campobasso.
- Whether the 2025 cap governs 1948 maternal-line cases. Contested and unresolved. See the 1948 page.
- Anything about the minor issue. That was decided separately by the Joint Sections of the Court of Cassation on 26 July 2026.
- Consular practice, waiting times and evidence standards. Not before the Court.
What it means for a reader today
The domestic constitutional route against the reform has been tried and did not succeed. If your line is excluded by article 3-bis, the argument that the law itself is invalid is not currently available to you in an Italian court on the grounds Turin raised, and the remaining hope is European rather than Italian.
That is a plain statement about where things stand, not a prediction about where they will end up.
- Constitutional Court, judgment 63/2026, public hearing 11 March 2026, deposited 30 April 2026, on referrals from the Tribunal of Turin against article 3-bis of Law 91/1992.
- Constitutional Court, order 147/2026, deposited 23 July 2026, referral to the EU Court of Justice under article 267 TFEU.
- Court of Cassation, first civil section, judgment 13818/2026, deposited 12 May 2026.
- Court of Cassation, Joint Sections, judgment 24045/2026, deposited 26 July 2026.
The Court's own case sheet was not reachable directly on the day of checking; the text and dispositive were read through published copies of the judgment and through the first-reading commentary in Questione Giustizia.
One next step
Since the statute stands, the only question left for your own case is whether it lets you through. The free check runs the four gates in order, and for a substantial share of readers it ends by saying no.
Run the free check, about two minutesNothing you type reaches us.