On Monday, December 15, 2025, Portugal’s Constitutional Court issued a decisive ruling on the proposed revision of the Nationality Law. They declared several key provisions unconstitutional and have now sent the legislation back to the President who will need to send it back to Parliament in order to make amendments to the current proposed version of the legislation. While the decision blocks some of the most controversial measures, it leaves other significant changes untouched. For current and potential Portuguese residents planning their next steps in Portugal, understanding what failed, what effectively passed, and what comes next is now essential.
It is important to note that this ruling does not overturn the entire reform. The Constitutional Court has only intervened only where it determined that core constitutional principles such as proportionality, legal certainty, equality, and protection of legitimate expectations were violated. The remaining provisions that were note mentioned by the Court will remain as is unless Parliament chooses to revisit them voluntarily.
What the Constitutional Court Struck Down
The Constitutional Court has declared four provisions of the revised Nationality Law unconstitutional. One was rejected by a majority of the judges. Three were rejected unanimously.
- The first provision blocked was the rule that would have automatically prevented access to Portuguese nationality for anyone convicted of a crime carrying a prison sentence of two years or more. The Court found that this automatic exclusion violated the Constitution because it removed any possibility of individual assessment. Judges emphasized that criminal convictions vary widely in nature and seriousness, and that the law failed to evaluate whether a given conviction actually undermined a person’s real connection to Portuguese society. By applying a blanket ban, the rule imposed a disproportionate restriction on the fundamental right to citizenship and conflicted with constitutional protections against automatic loss of civil or political rights.
- The second unconstitutional provision concerned the loss of nationality in cases described as “manifest fraud.” While Portuguese law already allows authorities to address situations where nationality is obtained through fraudulent means, the revised text introduced a new concept without clearly defining it. The Court concluded that the law did not explain how “manifest fraud” differed from existing fraud scenarios. This lack of precision violated the constitutional requirement that laws affecting fundamental rights must be clear, foreseeable, and narrowly defined. Without objective criteria, individuals could not reasonably know when their nationality might be at risk.
- The third provision rejected by the Court dealt with pending nationality applications. Under the proposed changes, applications already submitted would have been reassessed using the new legal requirements rather than the rules in force at the time of submission. The judges ruled that this violated the principle of protection of legitimate expectations, a core element of the rule of law. Applicants who followed the existing legal framework had a reasonable expectation that their cases would be decided under those rules not retroactively altered standards.
- The fourth provision, rejected by a majority rather than unanimously, allowed authorities to oppose or cancel nationality based on behaviors that allegedly rejected adherence to the national community, its institutions, or national symbols. The Court found this wording dangerously vague. It offered no guidance on what types of conduct might qualify. This makes it impossible, according to the Court, for individuals to anticipate what actions could trigger loss or denial of nationality. This uncertainty violated constitutional principles requiring determinability and strict parliamentary control over laws affecting citizenship.
In addition to these four provisions, the Court also ruled as unconstitutional the related amendment to the Criminal Code that would have allowed judges to impose loss of nationality as an ancillary penalty for serious crimes committed within a defined period after naturalization. The judges found that this measure breached principles of equality and proportionality particularly because it applied only to naturalized citizens and functioned as a fixed penalty without sufficient flexibility.
What Was Not Found Unconstitutional
Equally important is what the Constitutional Court did not reject. Some provisions were reviewed and allowed to stand. Others were never submitted for constitutional scrutiny at all and therefore remain approved.
The Court did not object to the removal of the rule that allowed the waiting period for a residence permit to count toward the nationality residence requirement. Under the revised framework, only time spent holding a valid residence permit would count.
The judges also did not find any constitutional issue with the absence of a transitional regime to soften the impact of the new rules, even though this omission significantly affects applicants already close to eligibility.
These points directly affect the immigrant community, but they were not considered unconstitutional by the Court and therefore remain part of the reform unless Parliament decides otherwise.
What Passed Without Constitutional Review
Several major changes to the Nationality Law were never analyzed by the Constitutional Court because they were not included in the request for preventive constitutional review. As a result, these provisions are effectively approved, although they are not yet in force.
One of the most consequential changes is the end of the ability to apply for Portuguese nationality through having a baby in Portugal. Under the revised law, birth in Portuguese territory alone would no longer create a pathway for parents to obtain nationality.
The law also tightens the rules for children born in Portugal. To be entitled to Portuguese nationality, babies born in the country would now require that one parent has held a residence permit for at least five years. This represents a significant shift from earlier frameworks that were more generous toward second generation immigrants.
Residence requirements for naturalization would also increase substantially. Citizens of Portuguese speaking countries would face a longer waiting period. Even after the Constitutional Court review, the time is still set to increase from five to seven years of legal residence with a residence permit. Applicants from all other countries would see the requirement increase to ten years. These changes alter one of the most predictable pathways to Portuguese citizenship and extend the timeline for thousands of residents, as we last reported in November.
Another approved measure is the elimination of the special nationality regime for descendants of Sephardic Jews. This pathway, which had already been tightened in recent years, would be formally closed under the revised law.
Because these provisions were not reviewed by the Constitutional Court, they remain legally intact and are expected to take effect once the legislative process is completed.
What Happens Next in Parliament
The Government must now revise only the provisions that were declared unconstitutional. These corrected sections will return to the Assembly of the Republic for a new vote. Importantly, Parliament does not need to reopen or renegotiate the entire Nationality Law. This targeted approach significantly shortens the legislative process compared to starting over from scratch.
Past precedent suggests that, once unconstitutional provisions are adjusted, the revised law can move quickly. In similar situations involving immigration legislation, Parliament has approved corrected versions within days of a Constitutional Court ruling.
However, the fact that the Constitutional Court has announced their findings at the end of the year may delay progress on the legislation even further. The Parliament is set to take a recess for the holidays from December 18, 2025 and may not return until mid-January. Legislative work is also usually interrupted around the presidential election period, which typically causes parliamentary activity to come to a halt for at least a week. These factors may delay final approval into the early part of 2026.
Practical Impact for Applicants and Families
From a practical standpoint, the Constitutional Court’s decision creates a temporary window of opportunity to still take action on submitting applications for citizenship based on the old rules. Until the revised law enters into force and is signed by the president with approved changes, the current five years to nationality rules continue to apply. This delay is particularly relevant for residents very close to meeting the existing five-year requirement for naturalization as well as for families planning births in Portugal who may be affected by the new rules for children born in the country.
While the long-term direction of the reform remains clear, the exact nature of the changes to legislation in the short term remains unclear.
The Waiting Game Continues
In summary, the Constitutional Court has drawn clear constitutional boundaries around how far Parliament can go in restricting access to Portuguese nationality and imposing penalties.
At the same time, the Court left major policy choices about the residence time required to citizenship and birthright rules untouched. The revised nationality law will move forward after the sections found to be unconstitutional are altered or removed, but it will still represent a significant shift for immigrants and future applicants.
The next phase now belongs to Parliament, which must correct the unconstitutional provisions and decide whether to proceed as planned or reconsider the broader impact of the reform on Portugal’s immigrant communities. Parliament will only need to vote again on the points that were found unconstitutional. It will not need to review the whole law, which will definitely speed up the final process.
