The Constitutional Court has published a judgment on three provisions of the Immigration Law

The Constitutional Court published a judgment on November 13, 2026, in the official gazette Latvijas Vēstnesis No. 220 (OP 2026/220), evaluating the compliance of three provisions of the Immigration Law with the Constitution. The notice is included in the “CONSTITUTIONAL INSTITUTIONS” section of the publication under the heading “Constitutional Court” and is registered under sequence number 4. The subject of the judgment is formulated precisely in the official publication: the compliance of point 4.1 of the second part of Article 61.1, the third part of Article 65.3, and the third part of Article 65.4 of the Immigration Law with the first sentence of Article 92 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia.

Three contested provisions and their benchmark

The judgment concerns three separate provisions of the Immigration Law, located in two different blocks of law articles — Article 61.1 and Articles 65.3 and 65.4. All three provisions are indicated in the official publication with precise part and point numbering, meaning that the court evaluated specific texts of the law rather than the articles as a whole.

• Point 4.1 of the second part of point 1 of Article 61 — point 4.1 of the second part of Article 61.1 of the Immigration Law;
• The third part of Article 65.3 of the Immigration Law;
• The third part of Article 65.4 of the Immigration Law;
• benchmark — the first sentence of Article 92 of the Constitution.

Article 92 of the Constitution as the evaluation benchmark

The first sentence of Article 92 of the Constitution is a constitutional guarantee of the right to defend one’s rights and legal interests in a fair court. It is one of the most frequently used constitutional control criteria in cases where a private person encounters a decision of the state administration. Constitutional Court judgments based on this article usually concern procedural guarantees — access to court, the procedure for hearing a case, and the means of appealing decisions.

The Immigration Law at the crossroads of active legislation

The publication of the judgment coincides with a period when the Immigration Law has appeared multiple times in the official gazette. On August 25, 2026, Latvijas Vēstnesis No. 162 (OP 2026/162) published the “Amendments to the Immigration Law” adopted by the Saeima, and on September 1, 2026, No. 167 (OP 2026/167) published the revised version of the Immigration Law as a separate law.

Parallel to this, citizenship legislation initiative processes have also taken place. On September 14, 2026 (OP 2026/176, point 3, decision No. 02-01.1/66) and November 2, 2026 (OP 2026/211, point 5, decision No. 84), the Central Election Commission adopted decisions to refuse the registration of draft laws “Amendments to the Immigration Law” submitted by the political party “Mēs mainām noteikumus” (We Change the Rules).

How to read the judgment in the official gazette

The official publication in Latvijas Vēstnesis indicates the subject of the judgment, not its operative part. The reasoning of the judgment and the decision on the validity of each norm must be sought in the text of the Constitutional Court judgment to which the reference in the publication pertains.

The practical significance is direct: if the court has found any of the three norms to be inconsistent with the Constitution, the procedure for challenging and appealing decisions in immigration cases changes. If the norms are found to be consistent, the existing procedure remains, but the court’s reasoning becomes a guideline for future court and institutional practice. In both cases, the Constitutional Court’s assessment of the first sentence of Article 92 is a binding argument for all institutions reviewing cases related to residence permits and immigration decisions.

For readers who have personally been affected by an immigration case, two pieces of data are essential: the contested norms and the date of publication. These allow for the determination of whether a specific decision was made before or after the judgment entered into force, and whether there are grounds for a review of the case.

Official source: Latvijas Vēstnesis, No. 220, November 13, 2026, OP 2026/220; section “CONSTITUTIONAL INSTITUTIONS”, Constitutional Court, point 4 — “On the consistency of point 4.1 of the second part of Article 61.1, the third part of Article 65.3, and the third part of Article 65.4 of the Immigration Law with the first sentence of Article 92 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia. Judgment of the Constitutional Court”. Additional references: OP 2026/162 (25.08.2026, point 2); OP 2026/167 (01.09.2026, point 1); OP 2026/176 (14.09.2026, point 3); OP 2026/211 (02.11.2026, point 5).