Five things to know about Poland's constitutional crisis
WARSAW — Poland's latest constitutional crisis has exposed deep political divisions between the country's pro-European government and conservative-nationalist opposition, triggering demonstrations and a new confrontation over the future of the Constitutional Tribunal.
Here are five things to know about the dispute.
Politicisation
Poland's wider rule-of-law conflict dates back to 2015 and centres largely on the Constitutional Tribunal.
Before parliamentary elections that year, the outgoing centrist majority in the chamber appointed five judges to the tribunal. The court later ruled that three of those appointments were valid, while two were unconstitutional because the vacancies arose during the next parliamentary term.
After coming to power, the Law and Justice (PiS) party rejected the previous government's appointments and selected its own candidates.
The dispute prompted concerns from the European Commission and became a central element of a long-running confrontation between Warsaw and Brussels over the rule of law.
Following the 2023 parliamentary election victory of a coalition led by Donald Tusk, the government pledged to restore judicial independence and resolve the tribunal dispute.
The election, in June 2025, of Karol Nawrocki, backed by PiS, created a period of difficult cohabitation between the presidency and government.
New judges

A protester confronts members of the riot police forces outside the headquarters of Poland's Constitutional Court in Warsaw during a protest on October 31, 2026.
The Venice Commission later recommended that judges should be able to assume office without requiring a presidential oath.
Demonstrations
Tusk's government says it wants to end institutional deadlock and reform the tribunal.
Supporters of the right began gathering outside the court in Warsaw, saying they wanted to defend judges appointed during PiS's years in power and prevent government intervention.
Tensions escalated after police were deployed around the tribunal and judicial and political authorities took steps affecting the court's leadership.
Prominent PiS and far-right figures denounced the government's actions as unconstitutional, while government supporters argued reforms were necessary to restore judicial legitimacy.
Nawrocki later travelled to the tribunal, where disagreements with newly elected judges further heightened tensions.