The Malacañang Palace supports the Supreme Court ruling declaring that Congress’s 39-year failure to enact an anti-political dynasty law constitutes grave abuse of discretion, according to a statement released on September 18, 2026, by Palace press officer Claire Castro. The unanimous high court decision mandates that the legislature fulfill its constitutional duty under Article 2, Section 26 of the 1987 Constitution, aligning with President Marcos’s legislative priorities.
Palace Stance and Legislative Timeline
Malacañang backs the Supreme Court’s position that barring political dynasties is a constitutional requirement that needs immediate legislative action, according to Claire Castro. President Marcos included the anti-dynasty bill in his legislative wish list last December to address political abuses and promote a fairer electoral system, Castro stated. While the administration wants the measure fast-tracked, it leaves the specific timeline entirely up to Congress. Castro acknowledged that lawmakers carry a heavy legislative workload, noting that the administration will not dictate their schedule.
Congressional Priority and Pending Bills
Speaker Faustino Dy III assured the public that enacting an anti-political dynasty law remains a congressional priority following the Supreme Court directive, according to statements reported by Inquirer.net. Dy noted that the House of Representatives already passed House Bill No. 8389, or the proposed Anti-Political Dynasty Act, on third and final reading last June. Meanwhile, the Senate has advanced its counterpart measure, Senate Bill No. 1901, which sits pending on second reading.
Supreme Court Guidelines and Legal Scope
Retired associate justice Antonio Carpio praised the Supreme Court ruling as an unprecedented and huge endorsement, pointing out that the high court issued non-binding guidelines for Congress, according to Philstar.com. Carpio explained that the unanimous tribunal proposed that a political dynasty definition could encompass relatives up to the fourth civil degree. Although the Supreme Court traditionally compels Congress to pass a law rather than dictate its contents, the bench provided these clear parameters to help lawmakers establish a definite and principled legal framework for equal access to public office.
Worth a look