The court has also refused to suspend the government’s extraordinary regularisation decree, allowing the process to continue while legal challenges from Valencia and Aragón are considered.
Madrid, July 13, 2026 — Spain’s Supreme Court has decided not to refer legal questions concerning the country’s extraordinary migrant regularisation programme to the Court of Justice of the European Union at this stage.
The court has also rejected renewed requests to suspend the Royal Decree that introduced the regularisation measure on April 14. The decision means that the programme can continue while the Supreme Court considers the substantive legal challenges brought by the regional governments of the Valencian Community and Aragón.
The decision was adopted unanimously by the Supreme Court’s Third Chamber. However, it should not be interpreted as a final judgment confirming that every aspect of the regularisation scheme is lawful.
The judges have so far ruled only on whether questions should be referred to the European court and whether the decree should be temporarily suspended. The Supreme Court must still decide the merits of the appeals filed against the measure.
On June 30, the court invited the parties to submit arguments on whether a preliminary question should be sent to the Court of Justice of the European Union. Such a referral would have allowed the European court to clarify whether parts of Spain’s regularisation decree were compatible with European Union law.
After considering the submissions, the judges concluded that a European referral was not appropriate for the time being.
Spain’s State Attorney’s Office argued that the regularisation of migrants falls within the competence of the national government and that there was no need to seek guidance from the European court.
The governments of Valencia and Aragón took a different position. They argued that the measure could have consequences beyond Spain because people granted legal status may later exercise rights connected with travel and movement within the Schengen Area.
The regional governments also raised concerns about the possible relationship between the programme and European rules covering asylum, return procedures and the wider European area of freedom, security and justice.
The Supreme Court also refused to grant the precautionary suspension requested by the two regional administrations.
In reaching that decision, the judges referred to their earlier reasoning from May, when they found that there was a clear public interest in allowing the regularisation process to proceed while the legal dispute remained unresolved.
The court previously highlighted the human consequences of the programme and concluded that its effects went beyond purely economic considerations. On that basis, the judges considered that temporarily stopping the scheme would not be justified.
The extraordinary regularisation programme is intended to provide a route to legal residence and employment for qualifying migrants living in Spain without regular immigration status, as well as certain applicants for international protection. Official government information describes it as a special process through which eligible migrants can obtain permission to live and work legally in Spain.
For applicants, the immediate effect of the latest court decision is that the regularisation process has not been suspended and remains operational.
Nevertheless, the legal dispute has not ended. The Supreme Court must still issue its substantive ruling on the challenges brought by Valencia and Aragón. It therefore remains possible that the court could later uphold, restrict or annul parts of the measure.
The latest decision should consequently be understood as a procedural victory for the Spanish government rather than a final judicial endorsement of the entire regularisation programme.