France Moves to Tighten Marriage Laws for Foreigners Without Residents Visa or Permit
New Bill Seeks to Prevent Marriages of Convenience
Top French politicians have backed a controversial bill aimed at tightening marriage rules for foreigners without legal residency. The proposal, presented to the Senate on Thursday by Stéphane Demilly, has gained support from Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau and Justice Minister Gérald Darmanin.
Demilly questioned the current system, asking:
“How is it possible to marry someone who is not legally resident in France?”
He further criticized the existing Civil Code, which he claims leaves mayors and registrars vulnerable when conducting marriages involving undocumented foreigners.
Background and Motivation for the Bill
Demilly’s push for reform began after Stéphane Wilmotte, mayor of Hautmont, refused to officiate the marriage of a man ordered to leave the country. The man, an imam, was later deported after a court case against Wilmotte was dropped.
“The current legislation against marriages of convenience is not enough, and places civil registrars in surreal situations,” Demilly emphasized.
Key Provisions of the Proposed Law
The bill, which passed its first reading in the Senate with 227 votes in favor and 110 against, would introduce several changes:
• Proof of Legal Residency: Foreigners seeking to marry in France would need to provide documentation proving their right to reside in the country.
• Registrar’s Discretion: If mayors or registrars doubt the validity of the documents, they can refer the case to the public prosecutor.
• Two-Month Suspension: The public prosecutor would have two months to conduct authenticity checks, with the power to suspend the marriage during that period.
• 15-Day Deadline: If the prosecutor does not make a decision within 15 days, the marriage would be automatically suspended until investigations are complete.
Supporters argue that these measures would provide mayors with clearer legal backing and prevent sham marriages designed solely for residency regularization.
Criticism and Constitutional Concerns
However, the bill faces fierce opposition, with critics claiming it violates constitutional rights. Socialist senator Corinne Narassiguin denounced the draft, stating:
“This draft law is contrary to the constitution. The irregular situation of one of the bride and groom cannot prevent the celebration of the marriage.”
Narassiguin accused the bill’s supporters of prejudices, suggesting they assume fraudulent intent whenever an undocumented individual seeks marriage:
“Behind your prejudices and obsessions, there are men and women. You are confusing the issue by citing sham marriages. In your imagination, it would be impossible to love a foreigner without the ulterior motive of regularizing their situation.”
Legal Precedents and High-Profile Cases
The French Constitutional Council ruled in 2003 that a foreigner’s irregular status alone cannot prevent marriage. Despite this, recent high-profile cases have reignited the debate.
For instance, Robert Ménard, mayor of Béziers, now faces up to five years in prison and a €75,000 fine for refusing to marry a French woman and an undocumented Algerian man in 2023.
Opponents Warn of Social Impact
Opposition leaders argue that the new law could fuel xenophobia and unfounded debates about immigration and marriage fraud. Narassiguin highlighted that:
• Marriage doesn’t guarantee residency: Procedures for residency regularization post-marriage are lengthy and uncertain.
• Marriage doesn’t protect against deportation: Individuals can still face deportation orders despite being legally married in France.
“Beyond the law, your vision of marriage seems to be a very sad one. This text is ultimately a text against love,” Narassiguin concluded.
What’s Next for the Bill?
The bill will now return to the National Assembly (lower house) for further readings. If passed, it could reshape France’s marriage laws, making it significantly harder for undocumented immigrants to marry legally in the country.
While supporters claim it would protect the integrity of the marriage institution, critics warn that it risks criminalizing love and violating fundamental rights.