After a bruising few months, Chancellor Olaf Scholz and senior members of his ruling coalition were relaxing at a reception in Berlin’s leafy Tiergarten park when an unprecedented rebuke from Germany’s top court dropped.

Scholz’s Social Democrats, the Greens and the Free Democrats thought they had put to bed an unseemly months-long spat over key climate legislation that laid bare fractures in the alliance and frustrated voters. At a venue in the shadow of the chancellery, they were enjoying a brief respite and preparing to regroup over the upcoming break.

But just as the sun was setting in Berlin on Wednesday, Germany’s Constitutional Court issued a bombshell preliminary ruling that upended the government’s plans to hold a parliamentary vote over a contentious heating law on Friday, the final session before the summer recess. In a split decision, judges in Karlsruhe ruled that lawmakers need to be given more time to assess the complex legislation, which would effectively ban new fossil fuel boilers from next year.

While the delay is only temporary, the embarrassing setback marks the latest sign of the government’s struggles and raises questions about the ability of Scholz’s coalition to tackle the many challenges facing Europe’s largest economy.

Read More: Europe’s Economic Engine Is Breaking Down

“It’s a notable defeat for Olaf Scholz’s coalition and pretty bad timing,” said Rachel Tausendfreund, a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund in Berlin. “The infighting over this law, in particular, was quite public and left the government looking weaker.”

The shock slapdown from Germany’s top court gives more ammunition to critics of the government who say it’s hamstrung by arrogance and bickering. It could also further fuel voter frustration. Support for the governing parties has dwindled to a combined 39%, with all three below the Christian Democrat-led conservatives and the far-right Alternative for Germany, according to a poll published by Forsa this week.

The AfD, which questions humans’ role in climate change, has been the main beneficiary and used the ruling as a fresh opportunity to lambaste Scholz’s alliance.

“The attempt by the coalition parliamentary groups to push through their half-baked, bungling law with a crowbar represents a gross disregard for parliament and its rights,” the AfD’s caucus leaders, Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla, said Thursday in a statement, calling for the complete withdrawal of the heating plan.

In recent days, members of the CDU-led conservatives have vowed to overturn the legislation — which provides incentives for electric-powered heat pumps — if they get elected after the next national election in 2025. The court ruling was prompted by a petition from a Christian Democratic lawmaker.

Scholz and his ministers were clearly caught off guard by the announcement. Senior officials from the three ruling parties met on Thursday morning and decided to re-schedule the vote in September, instead of holding an extra session during the summer break — a possibility left open in the court’s decision. That means the issue will stay on the public agenda throughout the summer.

Although the legislation — which is seen as crucial to Germany meeting its climate goals — is still likely to come into force as planned, the delay is particularly stinging for Economy Minister Robert Habeck, the bill’s main architect.

The beleaguered Greens’ vice chancellor — once one of the nation’s most popular politicians — has been the target of sustained criticism from opposition lawmakers and the media over the plan, which the Bild tabloid labeled “Habeck’s heating hammer.”

It’s been a particular source of tension between the Greens and the pro-business FDP. The two junior coalition partners have clashed frequently in recent months. Tussles typically revolve around climate policy and have included holding up a European Union ban on combustion-engine cars. Prodded by the FDP, Scholz’s administration also weakened emissions goals for Germany’s dirtiest industries.

Read More: German Greens Are in Crisis Like the Rest of Scholz’s Coalition

After earlier delays in sending the heating bill to parliament, Habeck accused his coalition partners of reneging and obsessing over poll ratings. FDP officials pushed back, saying it needed to make sure the planned legislation was economical and feasible for utilities and municipalities.

Those tensions were still evident on Thursday. Wolfgang Kubicki, a deputy FDP leader who has repeatedly clashed with the Greens, said the court’s decision is “deserved reward” for the party and accused it of exerting “inexplicable pressure” to get the bill passed.

The ruling coalition reached a deal on the law last month after watering down some of the provisions. A draft, however, didn’t reach members of parliament in time to give them at least 14 days to consider it before a vote, according to CDU lawmaker Thomas Heilmann, who filed the petition with the constitutional court.

The ruling in Karlsruhe — which focused on the legislative process and not the bill’s content — suggested that the coalition may have pushed too far in fast-tracking the legislation.

“Lawmakers not only have the right to vote but also the right to deliberate,” the judges wrote in their statement. “Members of parliament must not only be able to get information, but also to process it.” A final ruling in the case is still pending.

Germany’s courts have intervened in climate policy before. In 2021, the top court forced Angela Merkel’s administration to revise its climate targets, ruling that the government was putting future generations at risk by delaying the bulk of planned cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to after 2030.

Marie-Christine Ostermann, the president of an industry lobby that represents family-owned companies welcomed the court’s decision, saying that if lawmakers are not given sufficient time to examine legislation it risks a “creeping transition to an executive democracy.”

“What applies to good craftsmanship must also apply to deciding on laws: They need a reasonable amount of time and expertise to become effective,” she said in an emailed statement. “Anything else carries the risk of bungling.”

Author: Arne Delfs, Petra Sorge and Karin Matussek