A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration’s suspension of immigrant visas for citizens of 75 countries was unlawful, finding the policy discriminated on the basis of nationality and violated federal immigration law.
District Judge Jeannette A. Vargas of the Southern District of New York issued the decision, saying the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 prohibits denying immigrant visas based solely on nationality. The administration had told consulates to halt immigrant visas for citizens of Afghanistan, Brazil, Yemen and dozens of other countries on the ground that people from those nations were likely to require public assistance if admitted to the United States.
According to Vargas, the policy barred issuance of immigrant visas even in cases in which consular officers had individually assessed applicants and determined they were likely to be self-sufficient. The judge cited a U.S. diplomatic cable that instructed consular posts to refuse immigrant visas to applicants who had already been approved but whose printed visas had not yet left the consulate.
Vargas concluded the policy was “contrary to law” and exceeded the authority of Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Her ruling vacated the 75-country visa suspension and set aside visa denials that rested solely on that policy, allowing affected applicants to resume case-by-case processing.
A State Department spokesperson defended the administration’s approach as aimed at protecting the American people by upholding strict screening and vetting standards, and previously said the policy would remain in effect until officials could “ensure that new immigrants will not extract wealth from the American people.” The department declined further comment on ongoing litigation.
The visa suspension was part of a broader set of Trump administration measures intended to limit both legal and illegal immigration. Earlier this year the Supreme Court rejected an executive order that sought to restrict birthright citizenship, a separate move that lower courts had already deemed unconstitutional.
The lawsuit challenging the visa ban was brought by The Legal Aid Society, the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, African Communities Together, and individual petitioners including six U.S. citizens who had filed family-sponsored petitions and five intending immigrants who filed employment-based petitions. Plaintiffs’ lawyers argued the policy rested on false assumptions that people from targeted countries were likely to use public benefits.
Susan Welber, supervising attorney at The Legal Aid Society, called the ban “premised on a fiction” and said the ruling advances a fairer immigration system. Anna Gallagher, executive director of the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, said the suspension had separated spouses, parents and children who were following legal processes. Antionette Dozier of the Western Center on Law & Poverty said the decision restores case-by-case review and prevents any administration from overriding the law based on nationality.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys said the ruling will allow their clients to move forward in the immigration process and seek reunification with family members separated by the suspension.