Italy’s Supreme Court Reaffirms Birthright Citizenship Days After Constitutional Ruling
What Just Happened
On May 12, 2026, the Corte di Cassazione deposited Sentenza n. 13818/2026. The ruling reaffirms, in unambiguous terms, that Italian citizenship transmitted by descent is a “subjective right of absolute and primary constitutional relevance, existing from the moment of the holder’s birth, which is permanent and imprescriptible in nature.”
The Court stated this not once, but twice in the same judgment.
This language directly contradicts the framing adopted by the Constitutional Court in Sentenza 63/2026, which characterized unrecognized citizenship as a kind of incomplete expectation, something “precarious” until official verification. The Cassazione is saying the opposite: the right exists from birth.
Attorney Marco Mellone, one of the leading litigators in Italian citizenship law and counsel in the pending Sezioni Unite proceedings, called it “a possible positive prelude” to the long-awaited supreme court decision. In his view, the ruling reaffirms that citizenship by descent does not arise from administrative recognition but from the individual’s original condition at birth.
Why Two Courts Can Say Different Things
Italy’s legal system has two supreme courts with different functions. The Constitutional Court decides whether laws comply with the Italian Constitution. In Sentenza 63/2026, it ruled that the Tajani Decree is constitutional. The Court of Cassation is the supreme court for interpreting and applying ordinary law. For over two decades, the Cassazione has consistently held that jure sanguinis citizenship is automatic, permanent, and declaratory: it exists from birth and is merely confirmed by any later recognition.
These two courts operate independently. The Constitutional Court’s ruling does not overwrite the Cassazione’s interpretation of the underlying right. When Sentenza 13818/2026 reasserts the traditional characterization, it maintains a position that now stands in direct tension with the Constitutional Court’s reasoning. The question of whether you had a completed right before March 2025 is not settled.
The Standing Question
Sentenza 13818/2026 also addresses a critical procedural issue: standing to bring a court case. The Cassazione held that an applicant has sufficient standing when the public administration has created “impediments, difficulties, or delays that do not even allow the submission of the relevant request.”
What This Means in Practice
If the consular booking system prevented you from even filing your application, that system failure is itself sufficient grounds to bring your case to court. The government cannot use its own administrative failures as a shield against legitimate claims.
This is directly relevant to thousands of people who spent years trying to get through Prenotami, the Italian consular booking portal, only to find agendas permanently closed or wait times stretching years into the future. This holding aligns with the Tribunal of Bologna’s Sentenza 3335 (April 17, 2026), which similarly recognized that expressed intent to seek citizenship retains legal significance even without a completed appointment.
What the Constitutional Court Left Open
Sentenza 63/2026, despite being widely reported as a blanket rejection, deliberately left several questions unanswered. At paragraph 9.1, the Court explicitly declined to resolve the position of people who had started a recognition procedure but had not yet received a formal appointment by the March 27, 2025 cutoff.
The Court also drew a distinction between people who “took action” and people who “remained inert.” This language is being read by practitioners across Italy as an invitation for lower courts to protect applicants who can demonstrate they tried to pursue recognition before the deadline.
What Comes Next
Several proceedings will shape how the law actually applies. The Sezioni Unite heard oral arguments on April 14, 2026, with the Procura Generale arguing that depriving a minor of a right acquired at birth without consent is an impermissible “negative imposition.” Additional constitutional challenges are scheduled for hearing on June 9. And courts in Bologna, Brescia, Venice, Genoa, and Milan continue to issue rulings applying nuanced readings of the reform to individual cases.
What This Means For You
If You Filed Before March 27, 2025
Your case is protected. The Constitutional Court explicitly upheld the grandfathering of pre-deadline applications.
If you tried to file but couldn’t get through the system: You are in the strongest position among those who didn’t meet the formal deadline. The Cassazione’s standing ruling and the Bologna court’s recognition of expressed intent both support your position. The key is documentation: evidence of Prenotami attempts, emails to consulates, lawyer retainer agreements, or document orders from Italian municipalities.
If you qualify under the family exceptions: A parent or grandparent who held exclusively Italian citizenship, or a parent who resided in Italy for at least two continuous years before your birth, remain valid paths regardless of when you apply.
If you’re exploring relocation: Facilitated naturalization is now available with just two years of Italian residency for descendants of Italian citizens.
Italian citizenship by descent is not dead. It has entered a new phase, more technical, more selective, and more dependent on individual circumstances. Two supreme courts are providing different characterizations of the same right. Lower courts are carving out protections. And the Cassazione, just days ago, reasserted that this right exists from birth and does not expire.