The recent ruling of the Constitutional Court (TC), published on August 9, 2025 (Judgment No. 785/2025), brought relevant implications for the new Foreigners Law approved by the Assembly of the Republic. This judicial intervention, widely discussed in news articles published in major Portuguese media outlets, warns of the need to review normative solutions that conflict with fundamental constitutional principles.
Of a total of 19 standards submitted for successive inspection, the TC declared unconstitutional five provisions. Among them are rules restricting the extraordinary regularization of citizens with irregular documentation and a rule that imposed the termination of ongoing cases based on retroactively introduced criteria. Most of these rules were contained in Law No. 42/2025, approved by a simple majority in Parliament, and raised doubts regarding compliance with the principles of equality, dignity of the human person and reservation of law.
According to coverage of Público newspaper, the TC found that the retroactive revocation of acquired rights violated the legally protected expectations of foreign citizens. The suppression of the possibility of appealing certain decisions of the SEF (or its successor entity) was also considered a violation of the right to access to justice.
This ruling is particularly relevant at a time when the debate on immigration in Portugal is intensifying. The legislation aimed, among other objectives, to address social and political concerns linked to recent waves of migration. However, the Constitutional Court's partial veto now requires a rigorous legal reconfiguration that respects the Constitution.
This episode demonstrates the importance of ensuring that any legislative changes respect the limits of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic. The technical assessment and constitutional debate go far beyond mere political choices. The ruling establishes case law that binds future legal reforms in the field of foreigners' rights in Portugal.
For legal professionals—as well as the targeted communities—this type of decision is of heightened interest. It functions as a notice to navigation and outlines what can and cannot be done within the framework of respect for fundamental rights.
In a context where immigration legislation is constantly being reformulated, the Constitutional Court's role as guarantor of the rule of law remains essential. This role ensures a balance between the interests of the State and the protection of the rights of foreigners in Portugal—a central theme in contemporary public policy.
Legal implications of the decision for foreign citizens in Portugal
Impact of the Constitutional Court's Decision on Foreigners
The decision of the Constitutional Court (TC) to deem certain rules of the new law of foreigners has practical consequences for those residing in Portugal. First, those who faced extraordinary regularization processes based on the now-annulled rules will see their cases reevaluated considering previous legislation or new legal instruments. This scenario alters the expectations of legal instability for many foreign citizens, demanding a swift and effective response from the Portuguese authorities.
Court blocks changes to family reunification
The presiding judge of the Constitutional Court, José João Abrantes, detailed which regulations were deemed unconstitutional. Most of them concern changes to immigrant family reunification, five in total:
1. Exclusion of spouse:
"Regarding family reunification, the Constitutional Court considers that the new legislation, by not including the spouse or equivalent, may impose the nuclear separation of the foreign citizen holding a valid residence permit and is therefore likely to lead to the separation of family members of citizens who have been validly residing in Portugal for less than two years, which constitutes a violation of the rights enshrined in paragraphs 1 and 6 of article 36 of the Constitution”, highlighted Judge José João Abrantes.
2. Two-year term:
The judges also failed the two-year period for family reunification provided for in the new Foreigners Law. The court ruled that imposing a two-year deadline for submitting a family reunification application with all adult family members who are outside the national territory is incompatible with the constitutional protection owed to the family, particularly the cohabitation of spouses or equivalent to spouses and their minor children.
3. Conditions for regrouping:
The Constitutional Court also ruled that Article 101.3 of the new Immigrants' Law, which defines a set of integration measures for immigrants and their families who initiate the reunification process, is contrary to the Constitution. "The applicant and their family members must comply with integration measures, particularly those related to learning the Portuguese language and Portuguese constitutional principles and values, as well as attending compulsory education in the case of minors, as regulated by an executive order issued by the members of the Government responsible for migration, education, and labor," states the now-rejected article.
4. Decision deadline:
As for the rules on the deadline for deciding on the application for family reunification, the TC considered that “adding a decision period of nine months, extendable up to 18 months, to the two-month waiting period [for family reunification] is not compatible with the State's obligations to protect the family”.
5. Access to Justice:
The fifth rule to be considered unconstitutional changes the conditions of access to justice by immigrants from decisions or omissions by the Agency for Integration, Migration and Asylum (AIMA): “The appeal to a summons for the protection of rights, freedoms and guarantees is only admissible when, in addition to the assumptions referred to in article 109, paragraph 1, of the Code of Procedure in Administrative Courts, the action or omission of AIMA, IP, compromises, in a demonstrably serious, direct and irreversible manner, the exercise, in a timely manner, of personal rights, freedoms and guarantees, the protection of which cannot be effectively ensured through the available precautionary measures”, indicates the now rejected rule.
On the other hand, the TC considered constitutional the rule of the decree that establishes that whoever holds certain residence permits, for teaching activities, investment or cultural, has the right to "family reunification with family members," even if they are not minors, as is the case with other residence permits, which the President of the Republic considered potentially discriminatory. The President of the Constitutional Court considered that this rule "does not appear disproportionate or discriminatory" in relation to the article of the Constitution that provides that "no one may be privileged, benefited, harmed, deprived of any right, or exempted from any duty on the basis of ancestry, sex, race, language, territory of origin, religion, political or ideological beliefs, education, economic status, social status, or sexual orientation."
The TC's decision also binds administrative entities, such as the Foreigners and Borders Service (SEF) and AIMA, in conducting processes that depended on the invalidated regulations. It is crucial that these entities receive clear guidelines to prevent further violations of fundamental rights, ensuring that the principle of equality is respected in all procedures.
Given the current legal context and the need for a response from the legislative and executive branches, foreign citizens in Portugal should remain alert to legislative developments. Consulting reliable sources is recommended.
As the debate surrounding the rights of foreigners progresses, the political and legislative impact of these court decisions on Portuguese society cannot be underestimated. Protecting the rights of these communities reflects the country's commitment to justice and inclusion.
Political and legislative impact of the successive oversight of the Constitutional Court
Institutional consequences for the legislator and the need for legal technical reinforcement
The recent ruling of the Constitutional Court reinforced a recurring problem in legislative production: the hasty enactment of rules without prior verification of their constitutional compliance. This decision, which annulled five provisions of the new law on foreigners, reveals legal weaknesses in the preparation of diplomas and raises questions about the effectiveness of parliamentary scrutiny.
Successive inspections, in this case initiated by opposition MPs, revealed rules that clashed head-on with principles such as equality, legal certainty and the access to justice. This decision obliges the Government and Parliament to review the current regulatory framework, with a direct impact on policies on migration regulation.
The issue gains political dimension at a time when the debate on immigration in Portugal is particularly sensitive. The use of unconstitutional norms as an instrument of administrative control over migration flows undermines the legitimacy of institutions and weakens public trust in the legal system.
To avoid repetitions:
- The legislator must reinforce technical quality in the pre-legislative phase;
- It is important to reactivate the binding opinions of the legal services of the Assembly of the Republic;
- It is urgent to institutionalize optional preventive control mechanisms within the Constitutional Court for structurally sensitive materials.
In an increasingly fragmented parliamentary cycle, the temptation to legislate for short-term agendas must give way to the democratic maturation of legal solutions. This episode highlights that constitutional rigor is a non-negotiable criterion.
The President of the Republic, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, will return the Foreigners Law to Parliament without promulgation after the Constitutional Court announced its rejection last Friday.
Accessible legal information: a challenge that deserves a professional response
In a context where the impact of the decisions of the Constitutional Court directly affects foreign citizens, the need for reliable, accurate, and intelligible information has become central. Many articles that report these decisions, although relevant, fail to address the legal effects in a clear and technically supported manner.
When it was reported that five provisions of the new Foreigners Law, the legal interpretation of these standards — including the elements of unconstitutionality such as retroactivity or violation of right to appeal — was often diluted in political debates or simplified titles.
This gap compromises the understanding of the holders of rights and obligations themselves: individuals, companies that hire migrant labor, or associative structures that support the integration of foreign communities in Portugal.
It is at this point that it becomes essential not only to consult the judgment main Ruling (No. 785/2025), available on the website of the Constitutional Court, but also interpret its implications within the existing set of regulations.
Beyond Legal can assist in this process providing:
- technical legal analysis accessible to non-jurists;
- legal updates structured on relevant topics;
- contextualized interpretation of the legal effects in force;
- legal consultation service with personalized strategic guidance.
For those seeking fact-based guidance, legal certainty, and straightforward language, it is important to have access to professionals who are knowledgeable about both the constitutional framework and the administrative and legislative practices involved.
This is precisely where the intervention of experienced lawyers — like your Team at Beyond Legal can assist in — assumes special importance in the protection of fundamental rights.
English 
Portuguese