On 21 April 2026, the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) delivered a ground-breaking judgment in an infringement procedure started by the European Commission against Hungary’s 2021 “anti-LGBTI propaganda” law, finding for the first time an infringement of Article 2 TEU, which lists the EU values.

What is the case about?

Hungary’s “Law No LXXIX of 2021” amended various national legislative acts. Under the guise of protecting children, those amendments prohibited or restricted access to LGBTI content in the audiovisual, advertising, educational and retail sectors.

The Commission, joined by the European Parliament and 16 Member States, initiated an infringement action before the CJEU.

What did the Court say?

The CJEU agreed with the Commission on all points.

First, the Court found the law breaches the freedom to provide and receive services under Article 56 TFEU and various provisions of the E-commerce Directive, Services Directive and Audiovisual Media Services Directive.

The Court found that the law limits providers’ ability to develop and disseminate LGBTI content. Whilst such restrictions can be justified by the best interests of the child, Member States must exercise this margin of assessment in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

The Court found that this is not the situation in the present case, as the amending law discriminated against “non-heterosexual and non-cisgender (including transgender) people”, revealing a preference for certain identities and sexual orientation to the detriment of others.

Second, the Court found a separate violation of several Charter rights, namely the:

  • Right to human dignity.
  • Prohibition of discrimination based on sexual orientation or on sex, which, importantly, the Court found for the first time when applying the Charter, includes discrimination based on gender identity.
  • Right to respect for private and family life.
  • Freedom of expression and information.

The Court noted that the Hungarian legislation stigmatises and marginalises LGBTI people, encouraging hateful conduct towards them.

Third, the Court found for the first time a separate infringement of Article 2 TEU, which lists the values on which the EU is founded and which are common to all the Member States.

It considered that the Hungarian legislation introduces a coordinated series of discriminatory measures, resulting in the stigmatisation and marginalisation of LGBTI people, tantamount to establishing, maintaining or reinforcing the social “invisibility” of some members of society.

In those circumstances, the Court found that the legislation is in breach in a “manifest and particularly serious” way of the rights of LGBTI people, as well as the values of respect for human dignity, equality and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities.

The Court considered the law contrary to “the very identity of the Union as a common legal order in a society in which pluralism prevails”. Hungary cannot validly rely on national identity to justify the law. This sends a powerful signal that the infringement is particularly serious as it departs from the EU’s common foundation.

Fourth, the Court found that the legislation breached GDPR and the right to the protection of personal data guaranteed by the Charter, insofar as it widens access to information registered in the criminal records system concerning persons who have committed offences abusing the sexual freedom or sexual morality of children, without providing appropriate safeguards.

What is new in this ruling when it comes to Article 2 TEU?

This judgment builds on the Court’s previous jurisprudence referring to Article 2.

The Court reiterated that compliance with EU values cannot be reduced to an obligation a candidate State must meet to accede but may disregard thereafter. These values are given concrete expression in legally binding Treaty provisions, regulations and directives.

However, it made clear for the first time, referring to the wording of Article 2, its context and its origins, that this provision is not just legally binding, but also judicially enforceable as a self-standing legal ground of infringement, in case of “manifest and particularly serious” breaches thereof.

What will be the consequences for Hungary and beyond?

Hungary must now comply with the Court’s judgment without delay. If the Commission considers that Hungary has not done so, it may bring a further action before the CJEU seeking financial penalties.

As a result of the judgment, the Hungarian legislation at stake should be repealed, the different legislative acts amended as a result of this law should be amended and the laws adopted on the basis of the legislation at stake should also be repealed, notably the ban on pride and other LGBTI gatherings adopted in 2025.

In practice, the withdrawing of the legislation at stake means that:

  • Books featuring LGBTI content won’t have to be wrapped in individual foil and may be sold even within 200 meters of educational and religious institutions (a bookstore in Budapest was fined for selling the British graphic novel “Heartstopper” without a closed wrapping).
  • Movies and radio shows featuring LGBTI content may be broadcasted during the day too, not only between 22:00 and 05:00.
  • Sex education and bullying prevention can return to schools. Teachers and school psychologists can’t be intimidated into silence about LGBTI topics.
  • Exhibitions like the World Press Photo exhibition won’t be restricted for minors.
  • LGBTI people won’t be associated with persons convicted of paedophilia.

Beyond Hungary, this judgment means that other laws discriminating, stigmatising and marginalising the LGBTI community should also be considered as infringing EU law. Notably, Bulgaria also passed an “anti-LGBTI propaganda” law banning the portrayal of LGBTI identities in schools in 2024, and Slovakia changed its constitution enshrining the recognition of only two sexes, male and female, thus banning legal gender recognition in 2025. This judgment empowers the European Commission to act against other countries stigmatising LGBTI people and draws a clear red line for Member States contemplating similar legislation.