The Supreme Court obliges the Immigration Department to individually analyze criminal records before denying a permit

The Immigration Regulation amended by Royal Decree 316/2026, of April 14, is not currently subject to any specific parliamentary processing. It is a regulatory royal decree (not a royal decree-law), so it does not require validation by the Congress nor does it itself generate an associated “bill”. The reformed regulation is already in force as an executive norm, following its publication in the BOE on April 15, 2026. Any additional change would require a new regulatory reform by the Government or, if the Organic Law 4/2000 were to be modified, a separate legislative initiative, which is not linked to this royal decree.

1. Nature of Royal Decree 316/2026 and its approval process

The Royal Decree 316/2026, of April 14, “which modifies Royal Decree 1155/2024, of November 19, which approves the Regulation of Organic Law 4/2000…”, was published in the BOE on April 15, 2026, according to the BOE itself. It is a regulatory norm approved by the Council of Ministers and signed by the King, without the rank of law.

Its processing has taken place entirely within the Executive branch, following the classic stages of regulatory drafting:

• Prior public consultation on the amendment of the immigration regulation, opened by the Ministry of Inclusion, Social Security and Migrations, accessible on the Ministry's participation portal: public consultation.
• Public hearing and information on the draft royal decree amending the Regulation, also on the same portal: public hearing.
• Agreement of the Council of Ministers approving the royal decree of amendment, recorded in the Council of Ministers reference of April 14, 2026, where the launch of the extraordinary regularization process and its fit within the Regulation are detailed.
• Publication in the BOE and entry into force the following day, as indicated by the text published in the BOE of April 15, 2026.

Additionally, the new general immigration regulation that serves as the basis, Royal Decree 1155/2024, of November 19, was also approved by the Government and published in the BOE of November 20, 2024, following its own Council of Ministers agreement of November 19, 2024, reflected in this official reference.

2. Absence of specific parliamentary processing

In the institutional database that records the relationship between Executive norms and initiatives in the Cortes, the process corresponding to Royal Decree 316/2026 (Immigration Regulation) appears expressly as “publication by the Executive without associated parliamentary initiatives”. That is:

• There is no royal decree-law on immigration associated with this content that has had to be validated or repealed by the Congress.
• There is no record of any bill or proposed law in process in the Congress or Senate specifically aimed at modifying again either the newly reformed Regulation or the Organic Law 4/2000 as a result of Royal Decree 316/2026.
• No parliamentary motions, initiatives or control actions have been identified that generate a “legislative file” directly linked to this regulation; what may exist politically or in the media does not translate, as of today, into concrete legislative processing on the regulatory text.

Consequently, the “parliamentary processing status” of the Immigration Regulation after Royal Decree 316/2026 is, technically, nonexistent: the regulation is in force as a Government norm, but it is not being debated or modified in the Cortes through an initiative with the rank of law.

3. Broader normative context

The current Regulation is the result of a normative cycle that includes:

• The approval of the complete Regulation by the Government through Royal Decree 1155/2024, preceded by public consultation and hearing (consultation and hearing).
• The subsequent authorization of urgent processing of the draft royal decree amending it, by agreement of the Council of Ministers (cited in the Moncloa references) and its final approval in the Council of April 14, 2026.

In parallel, reforms of other organic laws (electoral, procedural, artificial intelligence, etc.) have been processed in the Cortes, but none of the initiatives listed in the institutional information refer to Organic Law 4/2000 or the Immigration Regulation in relation to this royal decree.

Therefore, as of today, the basic framework is:

• Organic Law 4/2000 and its previous reforms, approved by the Cortes in previous legislatures.
• Its regulatory development in Royal Decree 1155/2024 and Royal Decree 316/2026, both approved exclusively by the Government and published in the BOE.
• No ongoing parliamentary processing derived from the latest regulatory amendment.

The Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court is the body at the apex of the contentious-administrative order, according to the Organic Law of the Judiciary (LOPJ) and Law 29/1998 regulating the Contentious-Administrative Jurisdiction (LJCA). These laws attribute to it, in a coordinated manner, the knowledge in sole or final instance of appeals against the most relevant acts of the Government and constitutional bodies, as well as the resolution of the main cassation appeals. Additionally, the Chamber intervenes in specific matters such as judicial protection against certain agreements of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ), the Central Electoral Board, or data protection issues. Its powers are complemented by the participation of its magistrates in mixed bodies resolving jurisdictional conflicts.

Basic normative framework

The organization and powers of the Chamber are mainly set out in the Organic Law 6/1985 of the Judiciary, amended by laws such as Organic Law 7/2015, Organic Law 4/2013, Organic Law 2/2001, Organic Law 8/2011, Organic Law 4/1992, Organic Law 5/1995 or Organic Law 5/2011. In procedural matters, the LJCA is contained in Law 29/1998, partially amended, among others, by Law 3/2013 and Law 10/2012.

Among other related provisions, various ministerial orders implementing rulings of this Chamber or other Chambers of the Supreme Court can be cited (for example, the Order of May 29, 1992, [link]; the Order of February 9, 1988, [link]; the Order of April 30, 1984, [link]; or the Order of December 21, 1977, [link]), as well as historical norms on the distribution of powers among Chambers ([link]).

1. Highest body of the contentious-administrative order

The LJCA defines the contentious-administrative order as composed of:

• Contentious-Administrative Courts and Central Courts.
• Contentious-Administrative Chambers of the High Courts of Justice.
• Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the National Court.
• Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court.

The latter is, in fact, at the apex of the order and acts as a closing body: it hears appeals reserved by law and its decisions set the jurisprudential interpretation of administrative regulations, as highlighted by the LJCA preamble referring to the “very important objective function of setting jurisprudential doctrine”.

2. Sole instance knowledge of acts of the Government and constitutional bodies

According to the LOPJ, “the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court shall hear, in sole instance, contentious-administrative appeals against acts and provisions” of:

• Council of Ministers and Government Delegated Commissions.
• General Council of the Judiciary.
• Competent bodies of the Congress of Deputies and the Senate, the Constitutional Court, the Court of Auditors and the Ombudsman, under the terms established by law.

The LJCA specifies this competence (specific article on the Supreme Court Chamber), indicating that it shall hear in sole instance appeals against acts and provisions of the Council of Ministers and Delegated Commissions, the CGPJ and the Attorney General, as well as acts regarding personnel, administration and asset management of the Congress, Senate, Constitutional Court, Court of Auditors and Ombudsman.

3. Cassation and review appeals

The LOPJ attributes to the Chamber, secondly, the knowledge of cassation and review appeals “under the terms established by law”. The LJCA details that the Supreme Court Chamber shall hear:

• All cassation appeals, “of any kind”, and the corresponding complaint appeals.
• Cassation and review appeals against rulings of the Court of Auditors, according to its operating law.
• Review appeals against final judgments of the Contentious-Administrative Chambers of the High Courts of Justice, the National Court and the Supreme Court itself (with exceptions in the LOPJ).

In the system designed by the LJCA, ordinary cassation, cassation for unification of doctrine, and cassation in the interest of law are fundamental instruments whose apex is the Supreme Court Chamber, which closes the system of challenges in this jurisdictional order.

4. Other relevant powers and functions

Among other functions attributed to the Chamber or its magistrates, the following stand out:

• Control of electoral acts: the Chamber hears appeals against acts and provisions of the Central Electoral Board and contentious-electoral appeals against proclamations of elected officials, as well as appeals against acts of Electoral Boards in the election of members of the Governing Chambers (according to the LJCA and LOPJ).
• Data protection and new technologies: the LOPJ grants it authorization of certain declarations linked to data protection (fifth additional provision of Organic Law 3/2018), and it hears appeals against agreements of the Data Protection Supervision and Control Commission (introduced by later reforms, such as the one referred to in [link]).
• Measures in telecommunications: the Chamber authorizes, at the Government's request, the validation or revocation of certain agreements provided in Law 11/2022 General Telecommunications Law, a competence added by Organic Law 5/2022 (related to the reform included in [link] and related norms).
• Participation in jurisdictional conflicts: the LOPJ establishes that jurisdictional conflicts between courts or tribunals and the Administration are resolved by a collegiate body including two magistrates from the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court.

Finally, the jurisprudence of this Chamber radiates over the entire contentious-administrative order, and its doctrine-setting function explains why many legal reforms (such as those included in [link], [link], [link], [link], [link] or the correction of errors of the LOPJ, [link]) have sought precisely to strengthen its capacity for effective protection and its unifying role.

To obtain a residence permit in Spain, the basic regulations require that the foreigner hold an administrative authorization to reside, meet certain personal requirements (documentation, visa, lack of criminal record, not being subject to entry ban) and, where applicable, prove sufficient economic means. The regulation is mainly contained in Organic Law 4/2000, on the rights and freedoms of foreigners in Spain and their social integration, amended by successive organic laws, including Organic Law 2/2009. The law itself clearly distinguishes between the situation of stay (up to 90 days, extendable in specific cases) and residence (temporary or long-term). On this basis, different residence modalities are articulated, including those that incorporate work authorization and those granted for exceptional circumstances.

Basic normative framework

The general immigration regime is established in Organic Law 4/2000, of January 11, which has been amended, among others, by Organic Law 2/2009. The latter incorporates constitutional jurisprudence and several European directives on immigration, long-term residence, return of irregular migrants, students, researchers and victims of trafficking, as explained in its preamble.

Organic Law 4/2000 is developed by regulation (“criteria will be established by regulation…”, “regulation developing this law”), so many specific requirements (supporting documentation, tests, economic thresholds, etc.) are set in regulatory norms of royal decree rank and administrative instructions.

Stay versus residence

The law expressly distinguishes between stay and residence:

• Stay: entry with a visa can be for a period of up to three months, extendable without exceeding, in total, three months in a six-month period. In case of entry without a visa, only “when exceptional circumstances concur” can stay beyond three months be authorized.
• Residence: according to the article defining this situation, “residents are foreigners who are in Spain and hold an authorization to reside”, which may be temporary residence or long-term residence.

General requirements for temporary residence

Organic Law 4/2000, in its regulation of temporary residence, sets several general requirements (articles on residence and documentation):

• Residence authorization: all residence requires prior authorization; when it is for more than six months, the foreigner must obtain a foreigner identity card within one month from entry or from the granting of the authorization.
• Visa, generally required: the law itself provides that, in cases of residence for exceptional circumstances (arraigo, humanitarian reasons, etc.), “visa will not be required”, which presupposes its ordinary requirement in other initial authorizations.
• No criminal record: to authorize temporary residence “it is necessary that the person has no criminal record in Spain or in previous countries of residence, for crimes existing in Spanish law”.
• Not listed as inadmissible: it is required “not to be listed as inadmissible in the territory of countries with which Spain has signed an agreement to that effect”.
• Sufficient economic means: the initial temporary residence authorization that does not grant the right to work is granted to foreigners “who have sufficient means for themselves and, where applicable, for their family”, with sufficiency criteria set by regulation.
• Preservation of documentation: foreigners have the duty to keep documentation proving their identity and situation in Spain, as well as to communicate changes of nationality, marital status and address.

Temporary residence modalities

Within temporary residence, Organic Law 4/2000 provides several main routes:

• Temporary residence without work: the mentioned initial authorization for those who prove sufficient means and which does not include work authorization.
• Temporary residence and work: the initial authorization of “temporary residence and work” authorizes carrying out lucrative activities on own account and/or for others, referring to the provisions in its articles 36 and following to detail conditions and procedures.
• Residence for exceptional circumstances: the Administration “may grant a temporary residence authorization for a situation of arraigo, as well as for humanitarian reasons, collaboration with Justice or other exceptional circumstances determined by regulation”; for these modalities, the law expressly states that a visa is not required.

Long-term residence

Organic Law 4/2000 establishes that residents may be in a long-term residence situation and, in its specific regulation, provides that:

• The status of long-term resident is acquired, generally, after a period of five years of continuous residence in Spain, allowing only temporary absences under terms set by regulation.
• Foreign long-term residents in another EU Member State may request and obtain a long-term residence authorization or, if they want to keep the status in the first State, a temporary residence authorization in Spain.
• The law also provides for long-term residence for persons with recognized international protection in Spain or another Member State, with specific rules.
• Causes of extinction are contemplated (fraud, expulsion order, prolonged absence from the EU territory, acquisition of long-term status in another Member State, etc.) and the possibility of recovering the status through a simplified procedure.

Stays for studies and other non-labor activities

Finally, the law regulates a specific stay regime (not residence) for foreigners whose main purpose is to pursue or expand studies, carry out research or training activities, participate in student exchange programs, perform non-labor internships or carry out volunteer services. This stay authorization coincides in duration with the activity and may be extended annually if conditions are maintained. The norm also provides that those in stay for studies, internships or volunteering may be authorized to perform remunerated activities on own account or for others to the extent that they do not limit the continuation of studies or activity.