A federal judge in Argentina declared unconstitutional the executive decree used by President Javier Milei to freeze the University Financing Law. The ruling orders the administration to immediately implement the legislation, marking a definitive victory for national universities after months of legal and political battles.
Federal Court Rules Against Executive Decree 759/2025
The legal confrontation over higher education funding reached a major turning point on Tuesday, October 6, 2026, when Federal Contentious Administrative Judge Martín Cormick declared the unconstitutionality of Decree N° 759/2025.
Judge Cormick’s decision specifically targets the decree’s invocation of older budget execution statutes to block the newer legislation. By nullifying this administrative roadblock, the court has ordered the government to proceed with the immediate application of Law N° 27.795, including the drafting of all necessary regulatory and executive norms to fund the nation’s public universities.
Judge Martín Cormick of Federal Contentious Administrative Court No. 11 ordered the immediate compliance with the University Financing Law through the issuance of the regulatory and executive rules necessary for that purpose.
Constitutional Clash Over Presidential Vetoes and Legislative Power
The dispute traces back to August 2025, when Congress passed the university funding package to adjust academic budgets for inflation, update salaries for teaching and non-teaching personnel, and secure resources for research and student scholarships. President Javier Milei initially responded with a total veto through Decree 647/2025. Undeterred, both the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate mustered the required two-thirds supermajority to insist on the bill, leaving the executive constitutionally obligated to promulgate it under Article 83 of the National Constitution.
Rather than enforcing the law, the administration published it on October 21, 2025, while attaching a condition tying its execution to the Financial Administration Law.
In his 50-page ruling, Judge Cormick dismantled that justification. The court emphasized that the legislative branch had already satisfied financing requirements through Article 9 of the university funding law itself, rendering the executive’s subsequent suspension unreasonable. Citing Supreme Court jurisprudence, the magistrate noted that the legislature is not bound indefinitely by its own past self-restrictions and that a later statute can override general restrictions from older laws.
University Leadership and Legal Demands for Full Implementation
The ruling resolves a collective amparo action brought forward by the Consejo Interuniversitario Nacional, various university groups, faculty unions, and the Universidad de Buenos Aires. Franco Bartolacci, president of the CIN and rector of the National University of Rosario, celebrated the resolution on social media as a crucial milestone for higher education.
Franco Bartolacci, President of the CIN, told X that there was a Favorable ruling on the core issue. One more and very important step to achieve full compliance with the University Financing Law.
While earlier judicial rounds yielded preliminary injunctions to protect specific salary updates and student grants—notably the Manuel Belgrano scholarships—the administration resisted full compliance. In earlier administrative actions, the CIN, the government and unions had signed an agreement on June 10, 2026, outlining a 24.33% salary increase (distributed as 21.33% in June and 3% in October), a 20% boost for operating expenses, 50,000 million pesos for university hospitals, and a 50% update to Manuel Belgrano scholarships, though the judicial battle over full statutory implementation persisted.
University Rectors Dispute Official Budget Calculations
The courtroom battle unfolds against a broader backdrop of fiscal friction. As noted by Radio UNR, analysts from the Congressional Budget Office calculated that the financial impact of the disputed university law represented only 0.23% of the gross domestic product. Nonetheless, university rectors had previously asserted that complying with the law required $11 trillion—nearly 50% more than the official project—while civil society organizations pointed out that maintaining frozen allocations for the 2024–2026 period consolidated values significantly below the 2023 budget in real terms.
With the federal court ruling definitively on the core dispute and imposing trial costs on the national treasury, the administration retains the option to appeal the decision to the Cámara Contencioso Administrativa Federal. However, legal observers note that the judiciary’s prior backing of related injunctions leaves the executive with an increasingly narrow pathway to maintain the freeze.