Belgium’s attempt to tighten its asylum system has suffered a second judicial blow, deepening a growing standoff between elected policymakers and the courts over control of migration policy.
The Council of State on Friday suspended a measure introduced by Migration Minister Anneleen Van Bossuyt that would have denied state accommodation to asylum seekers already granted protection in another EU country. The court claimed the policy risked leaving individuals in “complete destitution,” potentially forcing them onto the streets.
The ruling follows a February intervention by the Constitutional Court, which had already blocked the legal basis of the reform and referred questions to the European Court of Justice over its compatibility with EU law. Despite that, the government attempted to proceed using an alternative legal route—now also struck down.
Van Bossuyt’s policy was designed to curb so-called “asylum shopping” within the EU and relieve pressure on Belgium’s overstretched reception system, which has struggled for years to meet demand.
But the latest decision underlines a broader pattern seen across Europe: courts and legal challenges repeatedly slowing or halting efforts by governments to tighten migration controls.
The Council of State also criticised the minister for failing to seek its advice before implementing the revised measure, adding a procedural rebuke to the substantive ruling.
Supporters of stricter controls argue the case exposes how EU law and judicial activism are constraining national governments’ ability to respond to sustained migration pressures.
Opposition figures and NGOs welcomed the decision, while coalition partner Les Engagés urged the government to present a new plan.
The dispute is now set to move to the EU level, where judges will decide how far member states can go in limiting support for asylum seekers already protected elsewhere.
