The Consulta cannot intervene on iure sanguinis law

The Constitutional Court cannot limit the acquisition of citizenship by descent, through a manipulative ruling that chooses among several possible options, characterised by a wide margin of discretion, with incisive repercussions at the system level. The Constitutional Court, in S ruling 142, considered inadmissible the questions proposed by the referring tribunals of Bologna, Rome, Milan and Florence that raised doubts on a possible conflict with the Charter of Law 91/1992, for the part in which it established that it is citizen by birth the child of a father or mother who is a citizen, does not provide for any limit to the acquisition of citizenship iure sanguinis. The request was, in short, tointroduce additional requirements, in order to avoidthe multiplication of Italian citizens, recognised as such, even if born abroad and citizens of another State, only by virtue of the existence of an Italian ancestor, in the absence of any connection with the Italian system. This in a particular situation such as the Italian one characterised, especially in the past century, by a massive outgoing migration phenomenon.

Specifically, the Court noted that the referring judges did not dispute, in general, the suitability of the filiation bond to justify, in light of constitutional principles, the acquisition of citizenship. But they doubted that mere descent from an Italian citizen or national is sufficient to acquire the status.

For the judge of laws, however, the multiplicity and vagueness of the variables on which the doubts of constitutional legitimacy raised are based and the variety of discretionary choices that the Court should make, in the context of a multiplicity of options that have significant systemic repercussions, have resulted in the inadmissibility of most of the questions of constitutional legitimacy raised. In particular, inadmissible were the complaints relating to Articles 1, 3 and 117(1) of the Constitution, the latter in relation to the constraints imposed by European Union law. Nor did the "referral" judges indicate the international rule violated that would lead to non-compliance with the obligations.

For the purposes of the appeals submitted to the referring judges by foreign citizens, the intervention made by the legislature, during the proceedings, with Law 36/2025, which came into force on 28 March 2025, is then irrelevant for the purposes of the appeals submitted to the referring judges by foreign citizens. The law, by introducing Article 3-bis to the law of 1992, has deleted the automatism of citizenship for those born in another State of which they are citizens. Unless specific conditions are met, such as, for example, submitting the application by 27 March 2025 or in the case of birth or residence of a parent who is a citizen in Italy. Therefore, it is clear that all thedisputes that are the subject of the main proceedings, introduced with judicial applications filedbefore 27 March 2025, remain within the scope of Law 91/1992.

The judge of laws in the ruling, however, had occasion to recall that the Constitution recalls the idea of citizenship as belonging to a community that has common cultural and linguistic roots, but, at the same time, draws a community that is open to pluralism and that protects minorities.