Many people with a pending German naturalization application are uneasy right now. Following this autumn’s election results, and amid a noticeably harder tone in the public debate on migration and citizenship, applicants are asking one pressing question: What happens to my application if the rules change before the authority decides?

The concern is well-founded. As a general rule, a naturalization application is decided under the law in force when the authority makes its decision, not the law in force when the application was filed. Applicants who simply wait, therefore, carry a risk that grows the longer their file remains open, which is why many applicants now look for ways to speed up their German citizenship application.

At Schlun & Elseven Rechtsanwälte, our citizenship law team helps applicants move stalled naturalization applications toward a decision. Our lawyers escalate the matter formally in three steps: setting out the legal case for the pending application, setting the authority a deadline backed by formal complaints, and, where necessary, filing a failure-to-act lawsuit (Untätigkeitsklage) with the administrative court.

Why the Timing of Your Decision Matters

Timing matters because a pending application is decided under the law in force on the day of the decision, as the most recent change to German nationality law showed. When an amendment to the German Nationality Act (Staatsangehörigkeitsgesetz, StAG) abolished naturalization after three years of residence on October 30, 2025, it contained no transitional provision for applications already pending. Applicants who had applied under the three-year route and could not yet demonstrate five years of lawful residence were rejected, regardless of when they had filed.

Transitional protection is possible, but it is never automatic. The 2024 nationality law reform, for example, retained the earlier, more favorable rules on financial self-sufficiency for applications filed by August 23, 2023 (Section 40a StAG). Whether lawmakers protect pending applications and how far that protection extends are decided anew each time the law changes.

For applicants who meet the requirements today, the practical conclusion is straightforward. The sooner the authority decides, the smaller the risk that a future reform affects the outcome of the application.

Your Right to a Decision Within a Reasonable Period

As with other delays by German immigration authorities, applicants do not have to accept an open-ended wait. Under Section 75 of the German Code of Administrative Court Procedure (Verwaltungsgerichtsordnung, VwGO), an applicant can take the naturalization authority (Einbürgerungsbehörde) to court if it has failed to decide on an application within a reasonable period without sufficient reason.

Two points from the statute shape every strategy for a delayed application:

• Three months as the minimum: A lawsuit can generally be filed no earlier than three months after the application was submitted. Where the special circumstances of a case require it, a shorter period can apply.
• Sufficient reason as the deciding factor: Three months do not trigger a right to sue on their own. The question is whether the authority has a sufficient reason for not yet having decided.

If your application has been pending for more than three months without a decision, it is worth having a lawyer assess whether the delay is justified. Where it is not, the steps below put the procedure on a formal footing.

Step 1: Making the Legal Case for Your Application

The first step is a written statement from your lawyer that sets out the grounds for the application already on file. An application form and a stack of documents leave it to the authority to work out whether each requirement is met. A lawyer’s statement does that work for the authority, setting out, requirement by requirement, why the applicant is entitled to naturalization.

The statement walks the authority through each requirement of Section 10(1) StAG: five years of lawful residence, clarified identity and nationality, the required commitments to Germany’s constitutional order, a qualifying residence status, financial self-sufficiency, B1 German, the naturalization test, and no criminal convictions beyond the minor ones that Section 12a StAG disregards.

It also confirms that none of the grounds for exclusion under Section 11 StAG apply. Where identity is the sticking point, passport and identity document problems have to be addressed first. One practical point while you wait: keep your residence permit valid and renew it in good time. A pending naturalization application does not replace it, and Section 10(1) StAG requires qualifying residence status at the time of naturalization.

A structured statement covering each of these points has two effects. It removes doubt about whether the file is complete, which is a frequent cause of delay. It also creates a clear record: if the authority remains inactive afterward, it becomes much harder to argue that a sufficient reason for the delay exists. Where documents are missing or out of date, this is also the point at which to submit them.

Step 2: Setting a Deadline and Raising Formal Complaints

Once the legal case has been set out, the next step is a clear deadline. At Schlun & Elseven Rechtsanwälte, our lawyers ask the authority to decide or to state its position within a set deadline, typically four to eight weeks. The letter also makes clear that if the deadline passes without a response, the applicant will file a formal complaint and a failure-to-act lawsuit.

Two types of complaint are available, and our lawyers use both where the case calls for it:

• Complaint about the handling of the file (Dienstaufsichtsbeschwerde): This complaint concerns how an individual caseworker or office is dealing with the application, for example prolonged inactivity, unanswered inquiries, repeated requests for the same documents, rudeness or discriminatory treatment.
• Complaint to the supervising authority (Fachaufsichtsbeschwerde): This complaint asks the authority that supervises the naturalization authority to review how the case itself is being handled and to intervene. It is mainly used for legal errors, which the complaint has to identify specifically.

Both complaints are informal remedies. They can be raised without formal requirements or deadlines, but neither obliges the authority to issue a decision. Their value lies in bringing the file to the supervisors’ attention and documenting that the applicant has done everything possible before going to court.

The deadline set in the letter is separate from the three-month period under Section 75 VwGO, which runs from the date the application was submitted. Where those three months have already passed, the letter is the final formal step before court, not the start of a new waiting period.

Step 3: Filing a Failure-to-Act Lawsuit (Untätigkeitsklage)

If the authority still does not act, our lawyers file a failure-to-act lawsuit (Untätigkeitsklage) with the responsible administrative court (Verwaltungsgericht). Because the authority has not issued a decision, there is nothing to object to. Section 75 VwGO therefore allows the lawsuit to be filed without the preliminary objection procedure (Widerspruchsverfahren) that Section 68 VwGO would otherwise require before going to court. The same provision also sets out how the court proceeds:

• No sufficient reason for the delay: The case proceeds, and the court rules on the application. What counts as a sufficient reason varies between administrative courts, so the court responsible for your case matters. We assess this in an initial consultation.
• A sufficient reason for the delay: The court suspends the proceedings until a deadline it sets, which can be extended. A pending criminal investigation is one example: under Section 12a(3) StAG, the authority must suspend its naturalization decision until the investigation has been concluded.
• A decision within the court’s deadline: If the authority grants the application within that period, the case is closed.

In the third scenario, the lawsuit has done its job: the authority has decided.

What Can an Untätigkeitsklage Realistically Achieve?

The lawsuit ends the waiting, but it does not lower the bar. If the statutory requirements are met and no grounds for exclusion apply, the applicant has a legal entitlement to naturalization, and the lawsuit compels the authority to address that entitlement. If a requirement is not met, legal action cannot make up for it.

Applicants sometimes worry that going to court will count against them. Filing a lawsuit is not among the requirements that the authority examines under Section 10 StAG, so it is not grounds for refusing naturalization. The decision turns on the legal requirements for naturalization.

How Schlun & Elseven Can Help

At Schlun & Elseven Rechtsanwälte, our citizenship law team advises applicants at every stage of a delayed naturalization procedure, from reviewing the file and preparing the written statement to corresponding with the authority and representing clients before the administrative courts. Our German citizenship lawyers are experienced in failure-to-act lawsuits and in resolving delays with German authorities more broadly, including cases where an unclarified identity is holding up a file.

If your naturalization application has been pending without a decision, contact our team to have your file reviewed and your options assessed.