French immigration law: What are the measures deemed unconstitutional?

The Council, which is tasked with validating the constitutionality of laws approved by parliament, threw out all or part of 32 of the law’s 86 articles, largely for procedural reasons.

It notably struck down the bulk of clauses introduced by opposition rightwing lawmakers to further toughen the bill during a turbulent parliamentary process.

Read moreFrench court scraps large parts of hardline immigration law as unconstitutional

Opponents of the reform had accused President Emmanuel Macron's government of caving in to pressure from the far right to get the law through parliament. 

About 75,000 people took to the streets nationwide over the weekend to protest the proposed legislation, in anticipation of the Constitutional Council's decision.

Below are some of the key measures that were thrown out by the court.

• Delayed access to social benefits

The Constitutional Council rejected a key article making it harder for immigrants to access social welfare, which discriminated between French citizens and foreigners.

The proposed legislation made the payment of some social benefits to foreigners conditional on their employment status.

Immigrants without a job would have had to wait five years before receiving monthly rent assistance, known as APL, while those in employment would have waited three months.

The measure was seen as a major concession to the French far right and parts of the conservative Les Républicains, who want French citizens to enjoy priority status when it comes to social welfare.

• Migration quotas

The Council also rejected the introduction of migration “quotas”, which would have capped the number of immigrants accepted in France – excluding asylum seekers – over a three-year period.

This measure had been recognised as unconstitutional by Macron's own ruling coalition. It nevertheless agreed to add it to the revised bill in order to win the support of Les Républicains, while hoping the Constitutional Council would strike it down.

The move prompted critics to accuse Macron of seeking to pass the buck onto the Constitutional Council by submitting legislation he knew was contrary to France's basic law.

• Family reunification 

The top court also threw out a deeply divisive measure making it harder for immigrants to bring their families to France.

The bill stipulated that immigrants needed to prove they had resided in France for 24 months – up from the current 18 months – before applying to bring their families to France.

It also required applicants to provide evidence of a “regular” income and of French health insurance for each member of the family.

Such requirements would have been impossible to meet, Green lawmaker Mélanie Vogel argued during parliamentary debates in November.

“If the family of a foreigner is not in France, they are not going to be affiliated to its social security and their private insurance in their country of origin will not be valid in France,” she said.

(With AP and AFP)