In a Le Monde op-ed, constitutionalist Julien Jeanneney questions which body would review the constitutionality of a 2026 budget passed by ordinance amid parliamentary deadlock. He argues the Constitutional Council would be the sole legitimate judge in this unprecedented scenario since 1958. This could pit France's two high courts against each other.
Constitutional law professor Julien Jeanneney pens an op-ed in Le Monde to foresee the implications of the government using an ordinance to pass the 2026 finance law. Amid the current budget impasse, Article 47, paragraph 3 of the Constitution allows implementing the finance bill's provisions by ordinance if Parliament fails to act within seventy days of its deposit, neither adopting nor rejecting it.
No such ordinance has been issued since the Fifth Republic began in 1958, making the constitutionality review question novel. Neither the Constitution nor the organic law on finance laws explicitly assigns this power. Jeanneney envisions likely challenges to the Council of State or Constitutional Council, particularly if the ordinance mirrors the original bill, which could carry inconstitutionalities as budgets often do.
He describes a potential clash between the institutions as a "war of external conquest" over unclaimed legal ground. A precedent occurred in 2020, when the Constitutional Council asserted competence over ordinances previously handled by the Council of State. Parliamentary groups might challenge it for political gain.
Jeanneney asserts the Constitutional Council would be the sole legitimate judge, emphasizing the civic and institutional stakes that demand preemptive consideration.
