I guess the government isn't messing around with this new law trying to get Citizenship. Previously it was much easier but looks like this Russian guy trying to fight it lost in court. Not sure of the implications of this but looks like the easy path of lawyers going to federal court to gain citizenship for people that were living here illegally for a few years is dead.
www.fiscales.gob.ar
This URL links to an official press release from the Argentine Public Prosecutor's Office (Ministerio Público Fiscal), published on March 20, 2026. It details a significant legal opinion regarding a highly controversial recent change to Argentina's immigration and citizenship laws.
Here is a detailed breakdown of the case and the prosecutor's ruling:
Historically, obtaining citizenship in Argentina was strictly a judicial process handled by federal judges. The new decree removed this power from the courts and transformed it into a 100% digital administrative process handled entirely by the National Directorate of Migrations (DNM).
He concluded that the decree is constitutional and that shifting the citizenship process to the DNM is legally valid.
While Prosecutor Gilligan has endorsed the constitutionality of the administrative shift in this specific jurisdiction, the decree remains a battleground. For instance, other federal judges (such as one in Paraná) have previously ruled the DNU unconstitutional on different grounds, arguing the government bypassed Congress without a true "urgency." Gilligan's opinion solidifies the government's legal defense of the new system as these cases inevitably work their way up to the Supreme Court.
Dictaminaron que es constitucional el decreto que habilitó tramitar las ciudadanías ante la Dirección Nacional de Migraciones
El fiscal Miguel Ángel Gilligan opinó que debía rechazarse la presentación que realizó un ciudadano ruso contra el Decreto de Necesidad y Urgencia 366/2025 que le dio la potestad a dicho organismo de intervenir en las solicitudes de otorgamiento de la ciudadanía argentina.
This URL links to an official press release from the Argentine Public Prosecutor's Office (Ministerio Público Fiscal), published on March 20, 2026. It details a significant legal opinion regarding a highly controversial recent change to Argentina's immigration and citizenship laws.
Here is a detailed breakdown of the case and the prosecutor's ruling:
1. The Background: DNU 366/2025
In May 2025, the Argentine government issued a Decree of Necessity and Urgency (DNU 366/2025) that completely overhauled how foreigners obtain Argentine citizenship by naturalization.Historically, obtaining citizenship in Argentina was strictly a judicial process handled by federal judges. The new decree removed this power from the courts and transformed it into a 100% digital administrative process handled entirely by the National Directorate of Migrations (DNM).
2. The Legal Challenge
The change sparked immediate legal pushback. A petitioner filed a lawsuit challenging the decree, arguing that it was unconstitutional for the executive branch to strip the judiciary of its historical role in granting citizenship and hand it over to an administrative government agency.3.
Federal Prosecutor Miguel Ángel Gilligan, head of the Civil, Commercial, and Federal Contentious Administrative Prosecutor's Office No. 6, reviewed the case and issued a formal legal opinion (dictamen).He concluded that the decree is constitutional and that shifting the citizenship process to the DNM is legally valid.
4. The Legal Reasoning
Prosecutor Gilligan based his ruling on a few key legal principles:- Administrative Procedures are Valid: He argued that simply creating an administrative procedure to obtain citizenship does not inherently violate the National Constitution.
- The Guarantee of Judicial Review: The most important factor in his ruling was that the new system does not eliminate the justice system entirely. If the DNM denies a foreigner's citizenship application, that person still has the legal right to appeal the rejection in a federal court. Because the "last word" still belongs to a judge if a dispute arises, the applicant's constitutional rights are protected.
- Lack of Proof: He noted that the petitioner failed to demonstrate how this specific administrative setup violated the standards previously established by the Argentine Supreme Court regarding administrative vs. judicial powers.
Why This Matters in Context
This ruling is a major victory for the current administration's immigration policies. Since DNU 366/2025 was implemented, it has been heavily criticized by migrant rights organizations. The decree not only changed who processes citizenships but also introduced much stricter requirements (such as mandating two years of continuous residency without leaving the country and requiring rigorous proof of income).While Prosecutor Gilligan has endorsed the constitutionality of the administrative shift in this specific jurisdiction, the decree remains a battleground. For instance, other federal judges (such as one in Paraná) have previously ruled the DNU unconstitutional on different grounds, arguing the government bypassed Congress without a true "urgency." Gilligan's opinion solidifies the government's legal defense of the new system as these cases inevitably work their way up to the Supreme Court.
