The ramming of the Constitutional Court

August 8, 2025, Ratton Palace. The scenography harked back to the Passos Coelho era: a public reading of a long-awaited decision, a room full of journalists, and, finally, the resounding rejection of the government's proposals. But this time, it wasn't Social Security taxation or the future of the General Pension Fund that were on the table at the Constitutional Court. It was the Foreigners' Law.

It quickly became apparent that important points of the proposed law had not passed the scrutiny of the Constitutional Court, which ultimately declared five provisions of the Foreigners' Law, sent by the President of the Republic, unconstitutional. Minutes later, the President's website announced Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa's veto of the changes to the immigrant legislation. Consequently, the Foreigners' Law will return to parliament.

Between the Constitutional Court's rejection and the presidential veto, the country was immediately engrossed in a sort of political translation movement, in which the law would go from bad to good if it included the Socialist Party and excluded Chega, and, of course, also taking into account Montenegro's defeat versus the victory of "Marcelo 2025." Yes, because "Marcelo 2025" is a kind of antithesis of "Marcelo 2020," the one who not only didn't raise the unconstitutionality of states of emergency but also coexisted in constitutional harmony with Prime Minister António Costa, who, regarding the imposition of social distancing rules during the pandemic, declared that said rules were to comply "whatever the Constitution says" (the Constitutional Court later declared several of the measures taken during the pandemic unconstitutional , but this didn't cause any major upheaval).

August 8, 2025, Vila do Bispo. We were analyzing the legal and political framework of the rejection of the Foreigners' Law when it became known that a vessel had docked in Vila do Bispo with twenty-five men, six women, and seven minors, including a one-year-old baby and two children aged eight and ten . The Constitutional Court and "Marcelo the Winner" had just been shaken by reality, and reality dictates that Portugal cannot, under any circumstances, allow the idea that an Algarve route for illegal immigration vessels to take hold. Until now, the disembarkation of illegal immigrants in the Algarve has been rare, but this is due to sea currents and not so much to our vigilance. But since 2020, the year in which the SEF (Secretary of the Environment and Reform) reported the existence of a clandestine immigration route from the Moroccan city of El Jadida to the Algarve, it has been known that the exceptional nature of the Portuguese coast may end. And, a detail worth noting, this group presents substantial differences compared to previous arrivals in the Algarve on boats from Morocco: for the first time, women and children are among those disembarking, and as of this writing, it's not clear whether all the children are accompanied by their parents. If this were to happen, this would pose much more complex problems. One need only read the Spanish press regularly to see how the issue of unaccompanied minors poses far greater dilemmas than those of ordinary immigration, whether legal or illegal . (Regarding one of the points of disagreement between the Government and the Constitutional Court—family reunification—are unaccompanied minors still considered refugees and, as such, have theright to request reunification with their family ?)

Meanwhile, it is known that the immigrants who disembarked in Vila do Bispo have already begun to appear in court and that they have 60 days to leave Portugal. Whether they will seek another destination, as happened with other illegal immigrants who followed the same route, or return to Morocco voluntarily or forcibly, only time will tell. What is certain is that legislation must be adapted to the new reality of immigration, particularly regarding the deadlines for expatriation.

It's important to bear in mind that in various European countries, the way courts at various levels have interpreted immigration has contributed dramatically to the polarization of these societies, if not to their erosion. But the same courts that radically changed the way they view domestic violence, animal abuse, or crimes that cause social alarm, such as arson, have turned immigration into a trench where ideology and elitism combine: in the United Kingdom and France, not a day goes by without references to rulings that seem to have emerged from a contest of absurdities, and whose ex libris is the English court that ruled that an Albanian citizen convicted of several crimes could not be deported to his country because his son would not have the chicken nuggets he is accustomed to in Albania.

On August 8, 2025, in Portugal, a small wooden barge was enough to leave questions unanswered.