Spain’s Supreme Court has maintained a precautionary suspension affecting the voting rights of certain people who obtained Spanish nationality through the country’s so-called Law of Grandchildren. The decision applies to the general election scheduled for 29 November 2026 and follows the rejection of an appeal by the State Attorney’s Office seeking to lift the measure.

According to figures submitted by the Government to the court, 163,020 people are affected under the electoral register applicable to these elections.

What Has the Supreme Court Decided?

On 12 October, the Supreme Court’s Administrative Litigation Chamber rejected the State Attorney’s appeal against the precautionary suspension first imposed in September. The State Attorney and the Public Prosecutor’s Office had argued that there was insufficient time to review the relevant electoral registrations before the election.

The court maintained the measure, citing concerns about the accuracy and transparency of the electoral register for Spanish citizens living abroad. The ruling affects people whose registrations have not been completed or verified in accordance with the court’s requirements.

The decision does not revoke Spanish nationality. It concerns eligibility to vote in the upcoming election under the current electoral-registration arrangements.

Who Is Affected by the Decision?

The so-called Law of Grandchildren refers to a provision of Spain’s Democratic Memory Law that enabled certain descendants of Spaniards, including people whose families experienced exile, to obtain Spanish nationality.

The court’s precautionary measure concerns people who obtained nationality through this route but whose electoral registration falls within the categories under review. The suspension applies both to certain pending registrations and to electoral effects of registrations already made under the disputed procedure.

There is an exception for people who obtain the required certification from the relevant consular registry confirming that they meet the legal criteria relating to descent from exiles. The measure should therefore not be interpreted as a blanket prohibition affecting every person who acquired nationality through the Law of Grandchildren.

Why Is the Electoral Register Being Challenged?

The legal dispute centres on how the nationality rules were applied and whether the administrative procedure used to identify eligible descendants of exiles complied with the law.

The Supreme Court has raised concerns about the ability to distinguish between people who meet the legal requirements and those whose nationality applications were processed under a subsequent government instruction that presumed exile in certain circumstances.

The court has argued that the reliability of the electoral register must be protected. The Government and the State Attorney’s Office, however, challenged the continuation of the suspension, citing the impact on citizens’ voting rights and the limited time available before the election.

The precautionary measure was originally requested by the political parties Vox and Iustitia Europa.

Five-Day Period for Affected Citizens

The Supreme Court has given affected citizens five days to enter the proceedings and submit arguments concerning the precautionary measures. The decision is to be publicised through official channels to enable those affected to exercise their procedural rights.

The ruling was supported by five of the six judges who considered the matter. Judge Alicia Millán issued a dissenting opinion, arguing that the early election created a risk of irreversible harm to the affected citizens’ right to vote while the underlying legal dispute remained unresolved.

The Legal Dispute Remains Open

The Supreme Court’s decision maintains the suspension for the 29 November general election, but it does not resolve the underlying dispute on its merits.

The case concerns the interpretation and application of the nationality and electoral-registration rules, as well as the safeguards required to ensure that the overseas electoral register is accurate. Further legal proceedings may determine how the dispute develops and whether the precautionary measures are changed.