The suspension of the provisions on family reunification and asylum assistance comes in response to complaints brought before the court by affected asylum seekers and rights groups.
Belgium’s Constitutional Court has temporarily suspended parts of two new asylum measures adopted in July 2025. One is the policy tightening rules on family reunification, and the other is about limiting reception rights for certain asylum seekers.
The notice of the suspension, which was posted on the government website on Thursday, February 26, is seen as a "blow" to the current government's move to restrict asylum and migration rules in Belgium.
InfoMigrants breaks down the court rulings and how they can possibly impact asylum seekers, refugees, and their families.
Family reunification
What did the Court rule?
In its judgment of 26 February 2026, the Constitutional Court of Belgium ordered the suspension of specific provisions of the July 18, 2025 law. The Court has not yet made a final decision on whether the measures are lawful. Instead, it has referred several preliminary questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The Luxembourg-based court must now clarify whether the suspended provisions on family reunification are compliant with EU directives such as the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
What were the contested provisions?
In the family reunification provision, the new law imposed stricter conditions on people granted subsidiary protection, which is a status given to people who do not qualify as refugees but still need protection. To qualify for family reunification, the applicants and their spouses and children abroad would have to comply with the following:
- Payment of a fee
- A two-year waiting period
- Proof of sufficient income, housing, and health insurance
- Stricter evidence of family ties
Why did this case come before the Court?
The case was brought by two families who wanted to benefit from family reunification with relatives holding subsidiary protection status in Belgium. They asked the Constitutional Court of Belgium to suspend and annul the new July 18, 2025 provisions, arguing that the stricter conditions were discriminatory and incompatible with EU law.
To obtain a suspension, the applicants had to show two things: that their legal arguments were serious, and that applying the new rules immediately could cause harm that would be difficult to repair. In their case, the potential harm was prolonged family separation.
The Court agreed that the arguments raised serious questions under EU law and fundamental rights protections. Because families could face lasting harm while waiting for a final decision, the judges ordered a temporary suspension and referred key legal questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union.
As reported in Euronews, a person referred only as Mr M.S., was one of those who appealed to the court to suspend the new law, which was preventing him from being with his wife and one-year-old baby.
"I had to flee Yemen before my baby was born. I hope I can finally hold him in my arms. Every day I am afraid that something will happen to them," he told Euronews.
What happens now?
The suspension means these stricter rules put forward in July 2025 cannot currently be enforced. Applications from family members of people with subsidiary protection must be assessed under the previous legal framework until a final judgment is issued.
Belgium’s Migration Minister, Anneleen Van Bossuyt, emphasized to Euronews that the ruling concerns only subsidiary protection cases, not refugees. and described this category as a relatively small share of overall family reunification applications. The stricter rules for other categories remain in place.
What happens now?
The CJEU will evaluate and decide whether EU law allows the different treatment between refugees and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection.
Until the CJEU responds, the contested provisions remain suspended. After receiving the European court’s answers, Belgium’s Constitutional Court will issue a final ruling, which means either annulling the measures permanently or allowing them to take effect.
Read AlsoBelgium tightens migration rules amid worker shortage
Reception rights ruling
In a separate judgment on February 26, 2026, the Constitutional Court of Belgium also suspended parts of the July 2025 asylum reform concerning reception rights.
The contested measure stated that asylum seekers who had already been granted international protection in another EU Member State would no longer be entitled to reception in the form of housing support and material assistance from Belgium’s asylum reception agency, Fedasil.
Belgium is legally obliged under both domestic law and EU law to provide reception to asylum seekers while their applications are being processed. The Court found that serious legal questions arise as to whether excluding this category of applicants from reception complies with European asylum legislation and fundamental rights guarantees.
Because denying shelter could expose individuals to homelessness and severe hardship, the Court ordered a suspension of the measure pending a full examination of the case.
Why was the case brought?
The challenge was brought by applicants and supporting organizations who argued that the new rule could leave vulnerable people without basic shelter or assistance, despite Belgium’s legal obligations under EU reception standards.
The applicants claimed that enforcement of the law could cause harm that would be difficult to repair. The Court accepted that the risk of destitution met that threshold.
Who is affected?
The ruling affects asylum seekers in Belgium who had previously been granted refugee status or subsidiary protection in another EU country, but also applied for asylum in Belgium.
Without the suspension, this group would have been excluded from reception support, potentially leaving them without accommodation or financial assistance during their procedure.
What happens now?
The contested provisions are frozen. Fedasil must continue providing reception in accordance with the previous framework until a final judgment is delivered.
As with the family reunification case, the Court may seek clarification from the CJEU. The final outcome will depend on how the European court interprets EU legislation on family reunification and subsidiary protection.
Read AlsoNGOs: EU 'Return Regulation' endangers undocumented migrants