In an effort to try to keep the sub's feed clear, any discussion/questions related to DL36-L74/2025 and the suite of other proposed bills currently in Parliament will be contained in a weekly discussion post.

Click here to see all of the prior discussion posts.

Background

On March 28, 2025, the Consiglio dei Ministri announced massive changes to JS, including imposing a generational limit and residency requirements (DL 36/2025). These changes to the law went into effect at 12am CET earlier that day.

An amended version of DL 36/2025 was signed into law on May 23, 2025 (legge no. 74/2025).

Relevant Posts

• Masterpost of statements from avvocati
• European Court of Justice/International Court of Justice Case Law Analysis as it relates to DL 36/2025
• 1948 Cases and DL36-L74

Current Court Challenges

Corte Costituzionale

• DL36-L74 constitutional challenges:
  • Officially Referred:
    • Torino - retroactivity, EU citizenship law, fairness: Corte Costituzionale March 11 Livestream Watch Party
    • Mantova - within the context of "beneficio di legge" minor children: citizenship is a right from birth, deprivation of voting rights and legislative representation, etc.:
      • Breaking: Also The Court of Mantua Raises Today Constitutional Challenge on the New Citizenship Law for Minors
      • A Second Glimpse of Constitutional Scrutiny of Decree - Law 36/20205 Court of Mantua
    • Campobasso (first) - political motives and procedural abuse:
      • Third Corte Costituzionale Referral About DL36/L74 (this time from Campobasso!)
      • Campobasso third Constitutional Court Referral: Full Text and Analysis
    • Campobasso (second) - similar to first Campobasso referral:
      • 4th Corte Costituzionale Referral About DL36/L74
  • Current Status:
    • Torino case was unsuccessful and the current regime still stands
      • Full ruling (Italian)
      • Full ruling (English)
      • Attorney reactions to Corte Costituzionale ruling 63/2026
    • Mantova and both Campobasso hearing date set for June 9, 2026

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale (TAR)

• DL36-L74 administrative challenges:
  • “Benefit of Law”: A Category Invented by circular 26185? The Lazio TAR Decides on November 12th
  • Current Status: Dismissed due to TAR not being the appropriate venue
    • Sentenza n. 4681/2026 was released on March 13, 2026

Corte di Cassazione

• Pre-DL minor issue cases:
  • The Minor Issue is headed to the Sezioni Unite at the Corte Suprema di Cassazione!
  • Communication from Monica Restanio Lex Law Firm Regarding the pending proceedings before the Joint Sections (Sezioni Unite) of the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation, concerning the so-called “Minor Issue”
  • Current Status: awaiting outcome from April 14, 2026 hearing
• Ministry Challenging Pre-Unification JS at the Cassazione
  • Current Status: hearing date TBD

Miscellaneous

• Post-DL Court Cases Ruled in Favor of 3rd Generation Plaintiffs!
• 1948 Success in Bologna - Minor Children Added Post-L74/2025

Lounge Posts/Chats

All posts on r/juresanguinis are archived after 6 months because information becomes stale quickly and what worked 6 months ago might not be reality anymore. The mods can't pick and choose which posts get archived and can't un-archive a post once it's been archived.

Unfortunately, this means that the previously established lounge posts are old enough to have become archived, so new ones need to be created. You're welcome to create them yourselves or you can ask the mods to make specific ones.

Parliamentary Proceedings

Senate

• Atto Senato n. 1683
  • This is the bill moving JS applications to a central office, which previously passed in the Chamber of Deputies as DDL 2369 (see here).
  • Current status: passed on January 14, 2026

No movement since April 2025:

• Atto Senato n. 98
• Atto Senato n. 295
• Atto Senato n. 752
• Atto Senato n. 919
• Atto Senato n. 1211
• Atto Senato n. 1450

Chamber of Deputies

• None at the moment

FAQ

• If I submitted my application or filed my case before March 28, am I affected by DL36-L74/2025?
  • No. Your application/case will be evaluated by the law at the time of your submission/filing. Booking an appointment before March 28, 2025 and attending that same appointment after March 28, 2025 will also be evaluated under the old law.
• Has the minor issue been fixed with DL36-L74/2025?
  • No, and those who are eligible to be evaluated under the old law are still subject to the minor issue as well. You can’t skip a generation either, the subsequently released circolare specifies that if the line was broken before, it’s not fixed now.
  • See here for the latest on the minor issue.
• Can I qualify through a GGP/GGGP if my parent/grandparent gets recognized?
  • No. The law now requires that your Italian parent or grandparent must have been exclusively Italian when you were born (or when they died, if they died before you were born). So, if your parent or grandparent were recognized today, it wouldn’t help you because they weren’t exclusively Italian when you were born.
• Which circolari have the Ministero dell’Interno issued at this point?
  • May 28 - Department of Civil Liberties and Immigration, n. 26185/2025
  • June 17 - Department of Internal and Territorial Affairs
    • Central Directorate for Demographic Services, n. 59/2025
  • July 24 - Department of Civil Liberties and Immigration, n. not assigned
• Do I still qualify under the new law?
  • Check your eligibility with our Qualifinator 2.0 and shoot us a modmail if you notice any bugs.
• What are the major ongoing court cases? When are the hearings for these cases?
  • Please scroll up to "Current Court Challenges".

For years, I was working toward getting an appointment at the Miami consulate to begin my Italian citizenship application.

I tried every single day. The system didn’t work. There were never any appointments available. My account was repeatedly locked, which forced me to go through the password reset process again and again.
I documented all of it. I have screenshots showing password reset request. I have images of the booking system showing no available appointments at the exact times I was logged in. I also have my computer activity logs showing the dates and times I accessed the site. They show a clear pattern of daily attempts, failed access, and system blocks. It wasn’t occasional. It was constant, and it’s all recorded.

This was the process we were told to follow. I was trying to do it the right way and avoid going through the courts and paying for an attorney when my case was straightforward.

There is no minor issue, no break in lineage, nothing unclear. My case is a direct line and should have been as simple as applying through the consulate or the comune.

Eventually, I made a decision. If I couldn’t go through Miami, I would apply in Italy, the place where my great grandparents were born and married. Cattolica Eraclea Sicily I wrote to the consulate explaining my plan and requested my codice fiscale. I contacted my family’s hometown.

Then I waited.

And waited.

Months went by with no response.

No Codice Fiscale, my last document.
Meanwhile, my lease was ending. I had already gathered and apostilled all my documents. I had enough savings to sustain myself for a year, and a small business I could run remotely.

I believed in what I was doing. So I let everything go.

I sold my furniture. I quit my job. I booked a one way flight.
I arrived in Italy on March 8 and rented an Airbnb. I was fully committed.
I found an attorney who could help me obtain my codice fiscale and review my case, but his first available appointment was April 9. I could not move forward without that number, so I waited again.

During that time, I reached out to real estate agents, spoke with translators, and viewed apartments. I was actively preparing to establish my life there. Every action I took became part of the documentation I later submitted to Judge Caranna.

Then on March 27, the Tajani decree dropped.

By that point, I had already given up my home, my job, and my stability to pursue this process in Italy.

Today May 11 2026 Judge Caranna of Palermo denied my case, stating that I filed after March 27. That I waited too long.

The Ministry did not contest the case. Despite that, I was ordered to pay the full court costs. FULL COURT COSTS as if I didn’t lose enough.

And while I was already in Italy, already committed, already dealing with the consequences of that decision, Miami finally sent me the codice fiscale I had requested months earlier.

The last document I needed, the document that ultimately destroyed my life.

Now I am left with two codice fiscale, the possibility of a significant court bill, no job, and about five suitcases worth of possessions. I do not have a car, because I cannot purchase one without income.
I do not have a permanent home, because I cannot secure an apartment without a job.

I did not just lose a citizenship case, the foundation I had built my plans on disappeared.

I lost my home, my job, and thousands in legal expenses because the consulate system did not function, and nothing was done to correct it. I sit here angry at the audacity of this judge to require me to pay even more …after everything I lost

All because of the inefficiency of the Italian government.

I am shook to my core, I am heartbroken, I am angry and I am broken.

This is not how you treat people who want to be a part of the land their GGP’s cultivated,

My family can be traced back as crop farmers, shoe makers, peasants who now have a street named after their family.

My GF raised me and he sold me on this magical island at the tip of the boot from the time I was a little girl.

My grandfathers brother died fighting for Italy, yet the people in Italys government highlight people like Marco Rubio and his connection via his great great great great grandparents and deny mine.

Shame on you Italy, Shame on you!!

by Avv. Michele Vitale - italyget.com

On April 30, 2026, the Italian Constitutional Court published Sentence No. 63/2026, a highly anticipated decision regarding the constitutional legitimacy of Article 3-bis of Law No. 91 of February 5, 1992. This article was introduced by Decree-Law No. 36 of March 28, 2025, and subsequently converted into Law No. 74 of May 23, 2025.

Constitutional Questions Raised

The Turin Tribunal argued that Article 3-bis functioned as an unconstitutional retroactive revocation. The referral alleged domestic breaches of equality, reasonableness, and legitimate expectations (Articles 2 and 3 of the Italian Constitution). It also raised international law conflicts, specifically regarding EU citizenship rights (Articles 9 TEU and 20 TFEU), the prohibition against arbitrary deprivation of nationality (Article 15 UDHR), and the right to enter one's own country (Article 3, Protocol 4 ECHR). The tribunal's core grievance was the abrupt termination of substantive rights without an adequate transitional period.

The Court's Ruling

The Constitutional Court upheld the law in its entirety. Crucially, the Court classified Article 3-bis as a "retroactive preclusion of acquisition," rejecting the premise that it constituted a revocation. The Justices rooted this distinction in the constitutional necessity of an "effective link" between the citizen and the Republic, drawing on the democratic duties outlined in Articles 1, 4, and 54 of the Constitution.

The legislative balancing of interests was deemed proportional. The Court found no violation of legitimate expectations for those who missed the deadline, holding that their legal position had not sufficiently consolidated compared to individuals with pending applications. EU law arguments were dismissed outright: the Court noted that CJEU proportionality tests apply strictly when an established citizenship status is actively revoked. The remaining human rights claims were declared inadmissible due to defective legal reasoning in the lower court's referral ordinance.

Full Text of the Ruling.

You can read the full translated text of the sentence on my blog post here: https://italyget.com/constitutional-court-sentence-63-2026-jure-sanguinis/

My legal analysis

It's definitely too soon. Give me a few days to recover from the shock 🤦‍♂️

Edit: I posted a short video comment here Constitutional Court Ruling 63/2026: Why there is still hope for Jure Sanguinis.

Just a thought experiment since there is a lot of speculation from people hoping to prove their prior action can satisfy the *currently unknown* requirements for 63/2026 9.1 and 9.2 (if the CC follows through with this logic).

Please describe your situation or what specific action you think will constitute activation of your rights.

by Avv. Michele Vitale - Italyget.com

I want to share something important with this community, because lately I've been seeing information circulating that could lead people to make the wrong decisions.

Let's start with what actually happened.

Late March and late April 2026, the Tribunal of Brescia issued 5 rulings — all identical in their outcome — on four Brazilian-origin families who had filed petitions for recognition of Italian citizenship by descent (iure sanguinis).

All five petitions were rejected.

Why? Because the petitions had been filed in April - May, 2025 — after the Tajani Decree had already come into force (on March 28, 2025). The judge applied the new law. And noted that the Constitutional Court had already validated that same legislation.

End of story — for now.

What about Prenot@ami screenshots?

Over the past several months, I have heard it argued that anyone who booked — or even merely attempted to book — a consular appointment before March 28, 2025 would have a kind of "safe passage" from the new law.

This theory finds no support in the Brescia rulings. The judge did not consider whether the applicants had previously attempted consular bookings: he looked at the filing date of the petition and applied the law in force at that time.

A screenshot is not a formal legal act. An email to a consulate is not a petition filed in court.

And now, an important update from Bologna.

Since the Brescia rulings, a new decision from the Tribunal of Bologna has come to light — and it deserves specific attention, precisely because it directly addresses an argument that had been giving some in this community reason for hope.

Many of you will have read about a favourable ruling from that same Tribunal of Bologna which had apparently recognised citizenship in a post-reform case where applicants hadn't secured a consular appointment before the deadline.

The new Bologna ruling goes in the opposite direction — and does so explicitly.

The judge made two points that are particularly important:

First, only a formal court petition or a complete administrative application with full documentation qualifies under the transitional rules. Prenot@Ami screenshots, information requests, and any other informal acts do not count — the ruling says this directly.

Second — and this is the part that often gets overlooked — the judge rejected the argument that the consular deadlock excuses anyone. The reasoning is straightforward: Italian law has always allowed applicants to go directly to court, without first going through the consulate. So if you couldn't get a consular appointment, the judicial route was available to you. Not using it is not a valid excuse.

This ruling matters because it comes from the same court that issued the previous ruling which circulated as a positive precedent. Two courts, same city, opposite outcomes — which should tell you something about how uncertain this landscape remains.

So what can be done?

I don't want to create unnecessary pessimism: the legal landscape is complex and situations vary. There can be still paths forward, but they are selective and require a case-by-case assessment.

What cannot be done is to rely on optimistic interpretations that most courts, at least for now, are not accepting.

f you are still considering whether to proceed, do so on the basis of real legal advice, based on current and up-to-date case law, not vague assurances — and certainly not on the basis of a single favourable ruling from a court that has now, in a separate case, issued a decision pointing in the opposite direction.

For a more detailed examination of the 6 rulings, check , as usual , my blog post: 5 New Rulings from the Brescia Court — and Now Bologna Too: A Reading Without False Optimism – ItalyGet

In an effort to try to keep the sub's feed clear, any discussion/questions related to DL36-L74/2025 and the suite of other proposed bills currently in Parliament will be contained in a weekly discussion post.

Click here to see all of the prior discussion posts.

Background

On March 28, 2025, the Consiglio dei Ministri announced massive changes to JS, including imposing a generational limit and residency requirements (DL 36/2025). These changes to the law went into effect at 12am CET earlier that day.

An amended version of DL 36/2025 was signed into law on May 23, 2025 (legge no. 74/2025).

Relevant Posts

• Masterpost of statements from avvocati
• European Court of Justice/International Court of Justice Case Law Analysis as it relates to DL 36/2025
• 1948 Cases and DL36-L74

Current Court Challenges

Corte Costituzionale

• DL36-L74 constitutional challenges:
  • Officially Referred:
    • Torino - retroactivity, EU citizenship law, fairness: Corte Costituzionale March 11 Livestream Watch Party
    • Mantova - within the context of "beneficio di legge" minor children: citizenship is a right from birth, deprivation of voting rights and legislative representation, etc.:
      • Breaking: Also The Court of Mantua Raises Today Constitutional Challenge on the New Citizenship Law for Minors
      • A Second Glimpse of Constitutional Scrutiny of Decree - Law 36/20205 Court of Mantua
    • Campobasso (first) - political motives and procedural abuse:
      • Third Corte Costituzionale Referral About DL36/L74 (this time from Campobasso!)
      • Campobasso third Constitutional Court Referral: Full Text and Analysis
    • Campobasso (second) - similar to first Campobasso referral:
      • 4th Corte Costituzionale Referral About DL36/L74
  • Current Status:
    • Torino case was unsuccessful and the current regime still stands
      • Full ruling (Italian)
      • Full ruling (English)
      • Attorney reactions to Corte Costituzionale ruling 63/2026
    • Mantova and both Campobasso hearing date set for June 9, 2026

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale (TAR)

• DL36-L74 administrative challenges:
  • “Benefit of Law”: A Category Invented by circular 26185? The Lazio TAR Decides on November 12th
  • Current Status: Dismissed due to TAR not being the appropriate venue
    • Sentenza n. 4681/2026 was released on March 13, 2026

Corte di Cassazione

• Pre-DL minor issue cases:
  • The Minor Issue is headed to the Sezioni Unite at the Corte Suprema di Cassazione!
  • Communication from Monica Restanio Lex Law Firm Regarding the pending proceedings before the Joint Sections (Sezioni Unite) of the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation, concerning the so-called “Minor Issue”
  • Current Status: awaiting outcome from April 14, 2026 hearing
• Ministry Challenging Pre-Unification JS at the Cassazione
  • Current Status: hearing date TBD

Miscellaneous

• Post-DL Court Cases Ruled in Favor of 3rd Generation Plaintiffs!
• 1948 Success in Bologna - Minor Children Added Post-L74/2025

Lounge Posts/Chats

All posts on r/juresanguinis are archived after 6 months because information becomes stale quickly and what worked 6 months ago might not be reality anymore. The mods can't pick and choose which posts get archived and can't un-archive a post once it's been archived.

Unfortunately, this means that the previously established lounge posts are old enough to have become archived, so new ones need to be created. You're welcome to create them yourselves or you can ask the mods to make specific ones.

Parliamentary Proceedings

Senate

• Atto Senato n. 1683
  • This is the bill moving JS applications to a central office, which previously passed in the Chamber of Deputies as DDL 2369 (see here).
  • Current status: passed on January 14, 2026

No movement since April 2025:

• Atto Senato n. 98
• Atto Senato n. 295
• Atto Senato n. 752
• Atto Senato n. 919
• Atto Senato n. 1211
• Atto Senato n. 1450

Chamber of Deputies

• None at the moment

FAQ

• If I submitted my application or filed my case before March 28, am I affected by DL36-L74/2025?
  • No. Your application/case will be evaluated by the law at the time of your submission/filing. Booking an appointment before March 28, 2025 and attending that same appointment after March 28, 2025 will also be evaluated under the old law.
• Has the minor issue been fixed with DL36-L74/2025?
  • No, and those who are eligible to be evaluated under the old law are still subject to the minor issue as well. You can’t skip a generation either, the subsequently released circolare specifies that if the line was broken before, it’s not fixed now.
  • See here for the latest on the minor issue.
• Can I qualify through a GGP/GGGP if my parent/grandparent gets recognized?
  • No. The law now requires that your Italian parent or grandparent must have been exclusively Italian when you were born (or when they died, if they died before you were born). So, if your parent or grandparent were recognized today, it wouldn’t help you because they weren’t exclusively Italian when you were born.
• Which circolari have the Ministero dell’Interno issued at this point?
  • May 28 - Department of Civil Liberties and Immigration, n. 26185/2025
  • June 17 - Department of Internal and Territorial Affairs
    • Central Directorate for Demographic Services, n. 59/2025
  • July 24 - Department of Civil Liberties and Immigration, n. not assigned
• Do I still qualify under the new law?
  • Check your eligibility with our Qualifinator 2.0 and shoot us a modmail if you notice any bugs.
• What are the major ongoing court cases? When are the hearings for these cases?
  • Please scroll up to "Current Court Challenges".

If I were designing the new centrally managed application process per Legge 11/2026, I would...

Galera,

imagino que muita gente aqui esteja passando por algo parecido com o que eu estou sentindo depois das decisões recentes da Corte Constitucional (especialmente a sentença 63). Não tem sido fácil.

Pra mim, o que mais pesa é a sensação de ter tido um direito concreto nas mãos — algo que muita gente gostaria de ter — e simplesmente não ter conseguido exercer. Fica um misto de impotência, frustração e até uma autocrítica sobre proatividade.

Na minha família, a história começou lá em 2017. Uma tia reconheceu a cidadania italiana via administrativa na Itália. A gente já tinha praticamente toda a documentação por questões familiares, então acabou sendo mais rápido pra ela. O objetivo dela era claro: abrir portas pros filhos. E deu certo. Hoje meus primos já colhem esses frutos — intercâmbio, bolsa universitária fora, oportunidades que foram facilitadas diretamente pelo passaporte europeu.

Quando eu descobri que também tinha esse direito, foi um ponto de virada pra mim. Eu tinha uns 24 anos e estava tentando reorganizar minha vida. Comecei a juntar dinheiro, me interessar mais por educação financeira, correr atrás. Só que, sozinho, o custo era pesado.

Durante anos, eu insisti pra que o resto da família entrasse junto, principalmente pela via judicial, que diluiria o custo e tornaria tudo viável. Pra mim, sempre foi muito claro o valor disso — não só financeiro, mas de oportunidade de vida mesmo. Ainda mais considerando que a Itália era praticamente o único país que reconhecia a cidadania sem limite geracional. Na minha cabeça, era questão de tempo até isso mudar.

Mas ninguém fazia nada. Parte por conservadorismo, parte por comodismo, parte por aquele “depois a gente vê”.

Eu continuei insistindo, juntando dinheiro, tentando puxar o processo. Só consegui mobilizar todo mundo muito tempo depois — já em janeiro de 2025. Eu mesmo acabei assumindo a organização, correndo atrás de documentos, cobrando, tentando acelerar tudo. E, ao mesmo tempo, com aquela ansiedade constante de que a janela estava fechando.

E fechou.

O que aconteceu no fim de março de 2025 pegou a gente no meio do caminho. Vi gente na família chorando, lamentando, mas isso, sinceramente, me trouxe mais revolta do que qualquer outra coisa. Porque não foi falta de aviso. Foram anos de oportunidade.

Hoje eu estou na mesma situação de muita gente aqui: com o desejo de morar fora, estudar fora, mas agora com um caminho muito mais incerto, mais caro e mais difícil.

Nesse último ano, eu ainda me envolvi bastante com o tema, acompanhando tudo, tentando manter alguma esperança de mudança. Mas agora, sendo bem direto, a ficha caiu.

Vou ter que recalcular rota.

Enfim, é só um desabafo mesmo. Imagino que não estou sozinho nisso.

I am hearing that the minor issue may get overturned. Well at least I maintain hope. I got rejected by a consulate due to the minor issue. Should I ask them for my documents back at this point so I can use them for something judicial in the future? Has anyone asked for their documents back post-rejection?

I have seen dozens of posts asking whether hiring a lawyer and gathering documents before the March 27, 2025 deadline offers any protection. I haven't seen a post that cited the actual language in Sentenza 63/2026 that speaks directly to this and wanted to create this to help people out that are in a similar situation and questioning this position.

I am not a lawyer. But I am personally invested. I initiated a 1948 case with an attorney three years before the law changed and gathered documents through both Italian and US government channels. My case was only filed this year. Under the new rules I would no longer qualify. I have been following every development obsessively because of it.

Here is what the court said in point 9.1 of the ruling published on April 30, 2026

"Resta impregiudicata... la questione relativa alla differenziazione tra chi ha ricevuto l'appuntamento e chi ha avviato la procedura di riconoscimento della cittadinanza, ma non ha ricevuto l'appuntamento entro le 23:59 del 27 marzo 2025."

Translation: the question of distinguishing between those who received an appointment and those who initiated the citizenship recognition procedure but did not receive an appointment by March 27, 2025 remains open and undecided.

They did not close this door. And I think there are legal reasons why closing it entirely would be very difficult.

The ruling's own language in point 9.2.2 distinguishes between people who were completely inactive and those who took active steps, using the word "inerte" to describe the weaker category. The court protected those who formally filed on exactly those grounds. The logical extension to someone who had a lawyer, gathered documents, and government record requests but had not yet reached formal filing is uncomfortable enough that the court didn't rule on it.

The EU proportionality principles cited throughout the ruling make it even harder to close. Cutting people off mid-process without individualized assessment and without any transition period raises questions the court clearly did not want to answer at that time.

If you have a paper trail of intent and were blocked mid process, it seems that there is still hope. Has anyone heard anything else about prior intent, protection for people that were mid process or cases where this has been argued?

Hey everyone.

I have been seeing a lot of people on here posting that you can now only claim through your last born Italian parent or grandparent.

However this is contrary to the requirements stated on the London consulate’s website:

“Sole ownership of Italian citizenship by the ancestor

A parent or grandparent must own only Italian citizenship, or must have held only Italian citizenship at the time of their death. Self-declarations stating the negative ownership of other citizenships are not accepted.”

This is also different to what is explicitly outlined within the new legislation outline the routes to citizenship:

“a)
Citizenship status was recognised under the previous law
because an application (with documentation) was submitted
to the consulate or municipality by 11:59 PM on 27 March 2025

a‑bis)
Citizenship status was recognised under the previous law
because an application (with documentation) was submitted
on a date already scheduled (appointment)
and that appointment had been communicated by the authority
by 11:59 PM on 27 March 2025

b)
Citizenship status was established by a court
under the previous law
based on a legal claim submitted by
11:59 PM on 27 March 2025

c)
A parent or grandparent possesses, or possessed at the time of death,
exclusively Italian citizenship

d)
A parent or adoptive parent
resided in Italy for at least 2 continuous years
after acquiring Italian citizenship
and before the child’s birth (or adoption)”

I believe I’d fall under exception C

I could really do with clarification from someone who is familiar with the new rules.

My grandmother was born in Monaco (monegasque citizenship is really hard to get you don’t become monegasque from being born there and I have proof of no naturalisation) from two Italian parents she was registered at the Manchester consulate and never acquired British citizenship so my interpretation was that I am eligible.

Thanks in advance for any advice!

P.s.

It also says this on the documents needed for citizenship by descent

“Ascendants (Grandparents and/or Parents)

Certificate of the Italian ancestor’s residence records (issued by the last Italian municipality of residence or AIRE registration).

Registry Office certificates: full birth certificate (Italian “atto integrale di nascita” or foreign equivalent), marriage certificate, divorce decree or spouse’s death certificate (if applicable), and eventual second marriage certificate.

Italian certificates must be original, of recent emission, issued by the competent Italian municipality.

Notice how it says ‘or AIRE’ and ‘or foreign equivalent’

I did as much research, document gathering and apostilling as possible myself to save money and it’s still costing an arm and a leg. Straightforward 1948 post-DL case for me and my sister (3rd Gen) and her daughter (4th Gen). No minor issue.

Hey everyone, I just had my judge assigned today (really I had a dream last night where it was assigned so checked first thing when I woke up).

I’m a post DL case in Palermo and understandably am a bit concerned since the Torino challenge was rejected.

Is there a way to check on how a judge has ruled on other JS cases? I want to see how JS-friendly my judge might be. Just looking for a bit of optimism. 🤞

Hi everyone!

I'm really struggling to get these documents together. For context, im 21, i was born and raised in Canada, both of my parents were also born and raised in Canada. My grandparents however, on both sides, were born and raised in Italy. I have one grandparent (dads mom) who still have her PR and never naturalized. I was thinking of getting my citizenship through her.

PLEASE someone help me finalize which documents are needed. I keep getting different answers.

I know i need:

1. Nonna's birth certificate
2. Marriage certificate
3. Italian expired passport helps
4. PR card for proof of no naturalization
5. My birth certificate
6. Divorce certificate (her and my nonno got divorced)

Do i need

1. Both of my parents birth certificates?
2. Both of my grandparents (my nonno and my nonno)'s birth certificates?
3. My nonno's death certificate since he passed?
4. Grandfathers ID? (when he passed away, they lost his wallet with all of his ID...really hoping I don't need more than just his birth certificate...im hoping i dont need his at all actually)

I'm just not exactly sure what is needed.

I know this will take years...but i REALLLLLLY want this citizenship. I need to get these documents in order and i just dont know exactly what im looking for.

im stressed. please help. someone who has done this before. please. thank you

HERES WHAT I KNOW

GM - born in italy 1951, came to canada in 1967, i was born in 2004, dad was born in 1976.

GF - born in italy (idk when)

GM - never naturalized, has PR card; italian passport expired

am i even qualified?? do i only need to prove lineage from her, to my dad, to more, or do i need my nonno (dads dad)'s info?

I got my Italian citizenship in 2021 with JS through my dad. If I married today and had a child 9 months from now, can I pass Italian citizenship to my wife and kids?

I’ve only just seen the rules have changed? Did I t all confusing to follow

I plan on visiting my Comune (Mesoraca, down in Calabria) in a few months to follow up on my application. I applied April 2024, had a few homework items but they got submitted quickly. Applied in Chicago.
When trying to get ahold of my Comune to get paperwork, basically I couldn’t (they didn’t respond to phone call, email, snail mail, nothing) and had to hire someone in Italy to go get it for me (but he was able to acquire them, I believe easily?? So that’s good). So now, over two years since the application was submitted, I’m going to head to Italy, for vacation, to meet more cousins (I’ve met two, who live up north and speak English, but I’m so excited to meet more!! The ones down south don’t speak English though so that’ll be a fun adventure 😂) and to visit the Comune to ask about my application!

Has anyone done this before? Gone to their community to check in. What was your experience? Any advice?

My cousins down there don’t speak English, but I’ve hired someone to help schedule the appointment and to be my translator. The cousins have a bakery so I tentatively plan on bringing baked goods to the Comune people as a thank you/good faith gesture (and also to drive home that like, I have cousins there! I know my cousins there!). And I’ve been working on learning Italian. It’s not much but hopefully having a few words will also be a decent good faith gesture.

Thanks in advance! 💖
(Also, I hope the tag is ok? I couldn’t find a description of what was supposed to go under “lounge post” but none of the other flairs seemed super accurate so I just went with it 🙂)

Hi everyone! I just wanted to share how my husband's 1948 consult went with Anthony Moccia today, given all the uncertainty out there. His take is that things aren't looking good for people whose grandparents naturalized before they were born, and he wouldn't count on it ever working out. He acknowledged the tiny crack that 9.1 left open, but he thinks people should not pin much hope on that and no one with a grandparent who naturalized before the JS seeker was born should waste money on filing a new case right now - especially if they have the minor issue. My husband doesn't have the minor issue, but he does have a naturalized grandparent and evidence we have been working on this since 2023 - so his advice to us was to wait 3-6 months to get more data (meaning wait for more cases to be ruled on) and see which way the wind ends up blowing before we sink any additional cash into this.

Impressions and other info: This initial consult was free, which is nice. My husband and I both appreciated avv. Moccia's clear and honest communication, his paralegal gets back to you VERY quickly with any questions, and his fee structure seems extremely reasonable. He charges a flat fee; there are no billable hours and his fee includes document translation. Clients can break the fee up into 4 monthly payments if that's easier for them. For 1948 cases he does not file with death certificates or out-of-line documents, and he does not force clients to try to address every little name discrepancy (meaning anglicizations and slight alterations are not a problem). If my husband ever decides to proceed with his case, we are almost definitely going to hire avv. Moccia because we trust that he would not mislead us about our chances for success. If anyone has any other questions, feel free to ask.

È stata depositata in data odierna la sentenza n. 63 del 2026 con la quale la Corte Costituzionale si è pronunciata su uno dei temi più delicati del diritto pubblico italiano: la cittadinanza, quella acquisita per discendenza (ius sanguinis).

La decisione si inserisce nel contesto della recente riforma del 2025 (d.l. n. 36/2025, conv. in l. n. 74/2025), che ha introdotto limiti significativi alla trasmissione automatica della cittadinanza italiana ai discendenti di emigrati.

1. Il contesto normativo: dalla cittadinanza “senza limiti” alla riforma del 2025

Tradizionalmente, l’ordinamento italiano ha riconosciuto la cittadinanza per discendenza senza limiti generazionali, purché non vi fosse stata interruzione della linea di trasmissione.

La riforma del 2025 ha però modificato questo assetto, introducendo condizioni più restrittive, tra cui:

• limiti alla trasmissione automatica della cittadinanza;
• rilevanza del possesso di altra cittadinanza;
• possibili effetti retroattivi della nuova disciplina.

Tali novità hanno sollevato numerosi dubbi di legittimità costituzionale, sfociati in diverse questioni incidentali sollevate dai giudici ordinari.

2. La questione di costituzionalità

È noto che la sentenza n. 63/2026 trae origine da un giudizio in via incidentale promosso dal Tribunale di Torino, chiamato a valutare la legittimità delle nuove norme che limitano il riconoscimento della cittadinanza iure sanguinis.

In particolare, i dubbi riguardavano:

• la possibile violazione del principio di eguaglianza (art. 3 Cost.);
• la lesione di diritti soggettivi già maturati;
• l’eventuale illegittimità degli effetti retroattivi della legge.

La Corte costituzionale ha respinto le questioni di legittimità costituzionale, ritenendo le norme compatibili con la Costituzione ed ha ribadito alcuni principi fondamentali:

a) Ampia discrezionalità del legislatore

La determinazione dei criteri per l’acquisto della cittadinanza rientra nella discrezionalità del Parlamento, purché non siano violati principi fondamentali.

b) Assenza di un diritto assoluto e illimitato alla cittadinanza per discendenza

La cittadinanza iure sanguinis non è considerata un diritto costituzionalmente garantito in modo illimitato nel tempo o nelle generazioni.

c) Legittimità dei limiti introdotti

Le restrizioni introdotte dalla riforma del 2025 sono state ritenute non irragionevoli, in quanto mirano a:

• mantenere un legame effettivo con la comunità nazionale;
• evitare un’estensione indefinita dello status civitatis.

Questi sono, in estrema sintesi, i punti cruciali della pronuncia che, prima facie, sembra avere un taglio prettamente "politico".

Ad ogni modo, la sentenza n. 63/2026 non chiude definitivamente il dibattito.

Difatti il prossimo 9 giugno 2026 verranno esaminate le questioni sollevate, con 3 distinte ordinanze, dai Tribunali di Mantova e Campobasso.

Parte della dottrina continua a sostenere che:

• la cittadinanza per discendenza abbia natura di diritto originario;
• i limiti introdotti possano comprimere eccessivamente diritti soggettivi.

La stessa giurisprudenza ha talvolta sottolineato che le decisioni della Corte si limitano ai profili specificamente sollevati, lasciando aperti ulteriori possibili dubbi di costituzionalità oltre a quelli già sollevati.

Disclaimer: post soggetto ad aggiornamento in seguito all'analisi approfondita della sentenza.