The situation is becoming farcical. After being forced by the courts to officiate the wedding of a foreign national under an order to leave French territory (OQTF), the mayor of Chessy (Seine-et-Marne), Olivier Bourjot, and all his deputies announced their resignations rather than carry out a decision they deemed contrary to common sense and the authority of the State. But they hadn't anticipated the Seine-et-Marne prefecture's refusal of their resignations, citing the need to "preserve the continuity of municipal life" in the run-up to the 2026 municipal elections. In other words, the State refuses to enforce its own deportation orders, yet prevents local elected officials from stepping down when they refuse to be passive executors.
An unexecuted deportation order and a criminal threat… for elected officials, not for the State
The case originated with a planned marriage between a European citizen and an undocumented man subject to a deportation order. During separate hearings with the prospective spouses, the municipality stated that the man admitted his motivation "seemed to lie more in regularizing his personal situation than in the marriage itself." In accordance with the law, the case was forwarded to the public prosecutor.
The Meaux public prosecutor's office ultimately decided not to oppose the marriage, deeming the deportation order "no longer valid" and finding no evidence of fraudulent intent. The judge in chambers went even further: in an order dated December 10, 2025, he ordered the town hall to publish the banns within 48 hours and to set the wedding date before the end of the year. Faced with this obligation, Olivier Bourjot and his deputies chose to resign from their executive positions, while remaining municipal councilors. This was a way for them to stay true to their convictions without exposing the town to legal and financial penalties.
The paradox reaches its peak when the prosecutor points out that the mayor's "constant opposition" to the marriage ceremony is "likely to constitute a criminal offense." Thus, a mayor's refusal to officially acknowledge the presence on French territory of an individual under a deportation order can be criminally punishable, while the state's failure to enforce that same order is not. "The world turned upside down," summarizes Olivier Bourjot in a press release. It's hard to disagree with him.
A contradiction already denounced in Béziers
The Chessy case is not an isolated one. In Béziers, Mayor Robert Ménard is being prosecuted for refusing to marry a French woman and an Algerian man under an OQTF (Obligation to Leave French Territory). His case perfectly encapsulates the legal predicament in which mayors find themselves.
“On the one hand, as mayor, I am a civil registrar, so I have to marry people. On the other hand, I am also a judicial police officer, I have to enforce safety and public order. Yet I am being ordered to marry someone who was subject to a deportation order. I couldn't marry them, it's a matter of common sense.”
This contradiction is not marginal and places mayors at the heart of a conflict between the law, justice and the administrative impotence of the State.
Public opinion is largely in favor of the ban
Contrary to what some official statements suggest, public opinion is overwhelmingly in favor of banning marriages involving undocumented immigrants. According to a CSA poll for CNews, Europe 1, and the JDD, conducted in May 2025, 73% of French people support this ban, compared to 26% who oppose it and 1% who have no opinion.
The legislature has already begun to act on this. On February 20, 2025, the Senate adopted, by a vote of 227 to 110, a bill aimed at prohibiting marriage when one of the future spouses is residing illegally in the country. The text strengthens the powers of civil registrars and the public prosecutor's office to combat sham or arranged marriages. It now awaits review by the National Assembly.
The Chessy case highlights the profound drift of a state whose authority has become asymmetrical. Implacable with local elected officials, it compels them to execute absurd decisions, despite its own failure to enforce its obligations regarding deportations. Far from being a mere legal debate, this crisis of coherence is morphing into a genuine crisis of confidence.
