Il fil rouge: dalla legittimità costituzionale all’ammissibilità referendaria della L. n. 86/2024

The Author draws a connecting thread between three judgments: the one on the constitutional legitimacy of Law No. 86/2024; the one on the legitimacy of referendums for the total or partial repeal of the same law; and, finally, the one on the permissibility of the total abrogative referendum. The analysis begins with the examination of Judgment No. 192/2024 and its multiple structure of: outright annulment, substitutive annulment, outright rejection, and interpretative rejection. The focus then shifts to the relationship between the Judgement of the Constitutional Court and the ordinance (December 12, 2024) of the Central Office for the Referendum at the Court of Cassation. The latter recognized the legitimacy of the total abrogative referendum, while excluding the feasibility of partial questions due to a controversial equivalence between the Constitutional Court’s interpretative rejection and legislative ius superveniens. Finally, the future permissibility of the total referendum question (by the Constitutional Court) is examined, challenging the validity of opposing arguments: the lack of unity in the question, the qualification of Law 86 as constitutionally necessary, and its connection to the budget law. The reflection is guided by the principle that freedoms must be protected to the maximum extent possible, while their limitations to the minimum. Otherwise, there is a risk that democracy is only mere appearance.