Avv. Giovanni di Ruggiero’s take is that DL 36/2025 is unconstitutional

Source

🚨 𝐔𝐏𝐃𝐀𝐓𝐄 𝐎𝐍 𝐈𝐓𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐀𝐍 𝐂𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐙𝐄𝐍𝐒𝐇𝐈𝐏 𝐑𝐄𝐅𝐎𝐑𝐌 🚨 ⚠️𝐄𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐔𝐍𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐒𝐓𝐈𝐓𝐔𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐓𝐘 𝐀𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐭! ⚠️

Following its publication in the Official Gazette, we have finally gained access to the text of the decree-law amending the rules on Italian citizenship. We can now assess its actual scope and present initial considerations.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐬

Decree-Law No. 36/2025, approved on March 28, 2025, introduces amendments to Law No. 91/1992 (on Italian citizenship) by adding a new Article 3-bis, which imposes strict rules on individuals born abroad with foreign citizenship.

In summary, anyone born outside Italy – even before the amendment’s effective date – and holding another citizenship will not be considered Italian unless one of the following conditions is met:

𝐀𝐩𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐦𝐢𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐌𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡 𝟐𝟕, 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟓:

The reform does not apply to those who have already filed an application for citizenship by descent (with required documentation) at a consulate or competent municipality by midnight on March 27, 2025. The same applies to those who initiated judicial proceedings for citizenship recognition by that date.

𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭:

For all others, the reform stipulates that – derogating from previous laws – no one will be considered Italian unless they meet at least one of these alternative criteria:

• An Italian parent (including adoptive) born in Italy;

• An Italian parent (including adoptive) who resided in Italy for at least two consecutive years before the birth or adoption;

• An Italian grandparent born in Italy.

𝐀𝐬 𝐚 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐞-𝐥𝐚𝐰, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐦𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐛𝐞 𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧 𝟔𝟎 𝐝𝐚𝐲𝐬. 𝐈𝐟 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐞𝐝, 𝐢𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐥𝐚𝐩𝐬𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐲. 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐝𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐬𝐨 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞.

𝐂𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐀𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐲𝐬𝐢𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦

The reform introduces a retroactive revocation of citizenship for those who acquired it at birth via ius sanguinis but did not file an administrative or judicial application by March 27, 2025, nor can demonstrate a generational link to an ancestor born in Italy within two generations.

If confirmed in its current form, the decree-law would be manifestly unconstitutional for the following reasons:

🚫𝐕𝐢𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐄𝐪𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 (𝐀𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐥𝐞 𝟑, 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧)

The reform discriminates among citizens of Italian origin based on place of birth or residence, imposing additional requirements (the "generational filter") on those born abroad. Moreover, it ties the retroactive revocation of citizenship to an arbitrary criterion: submitting an application by a specific deadline. This creates unequal treatment between individuals in identical circumstances (birth to an Italian parent), applying opposing rules based on a deadline unrelated to the acquired right.

🚫𝐑𝐞𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐕𝐢𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐲

Retroactively revoking already acquired citizenship contradicts settled jurisprudence from the Supreme Court and Constitutional Court, which have always recognized citizenship by descent under laws in force at the time of birth.

As reaffirmed by the Constitutional Court (e.g., rulings No. 78/2012 and No. 170/2013), retroactive laws must:

• Be justified by protecting constitutional principles;

• Respect reasonableness and proportionality;

• Not undermine citizens’ legitimate expectations.

Here, the retroactive amendment is unforeseeable, disproportionate, and violates consolidated rights.

🚫𝐕𝐢𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐥𝐞 𝟐𝟐 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 (𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐡𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐫𝐛𝐢𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐃𝐞𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐂𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩)

The Constitution prohibits citizenship revocation for political reasons. However, the reform amounts to a retroactive deprivation of ius sanguinis citizenship rights, recognized for over 150 years. The government’s justifications (alleged "national security needs") appear pretextual and politically motivated.

🚫𝐈𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐜𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲 𝐃𝐞𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐞 (𝐀𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐥𝐞 𝟕𝟕, 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧)

The "urgency" cited in the decree overlaps with grounds already deemed unfounded by courts in Bologna, Milan, and Florence in recent constitutional challenges. If the Constitutional Court, in its June 24, 2025 hearing, confirms the invalidity of these arguments, the urgency justification would collapse, rendering the decree further illegitimate.

𝐍𝐄𝐗𝐓 𝐒𝐓𝐄𝐏𝐒:

𝐓𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐌𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡 𝟐𝟕, 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟓: 𝐍𝐨 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐝, 𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐥𝐲.-

If the decree is ratified:

• For those who have not applied but meet the new criteria: The administrative route is currently blocked. Recourse to ordinary courts is possible, citing the impossibility of acting through consulates.

• For those who do not meet the new criteria: The only option is a judicial appeal challenging the reform’s constitutionality.

𝐖𝐞 𝐚𝐝𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭 𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐜, 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐱𝐭 𝟔𝟎 𝐝𝐚𝐲𝐬, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐮𝐠𝐠𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐮𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐧𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐝𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧.