A federal judge has struck down a Trump administration policy that froze immigrant visas from 75 countries, ruling that Secretary of State Marco Rubio lacked the legal authority to implement the directive.
U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas, a Biden appointee in Manhattan, vacated the State Department policy and any visa refusals based solely on it. The judge ordered the government to reconsider those cases.
"The Court holds that the Policy is contrary to law and was issued in excess of Secretary Rubio’s statutory authority," Vargas wrote in her 61-page opinion. She described the government's justification for the policy as "an exercise in Orwellian logic."
The policy, enacted in January, suspended immigrant visa issuance to nationals of 75 countries deemed by the State Department to be at high risk of becoming dependent on public benefits. The list included countries from Africa, Latin America, the Caribbean, Eastern Europe, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East.
According to the ruling, the policy effectively imposed a nationality-based ban on immigrants from nearly 40% of the world's nations. While the policy stated that consular officers were to review each applicant individually, Vargas found that even those applicants who passed the review and demonstrated they would not be a public charge were still denied visas if they were from one of the designated countries.
"While the Policy permits consular officers to exercise their normal functions up to a point, whatever determinations they make as to eligibility for the applicants subject to the Policy are ultimately irrelevant," Vargas wrote. "The outcome is predetermined. The visa will be refused."
The judge determined that the directive sidelined the consular officers Congress tasked with determining individual visa eligibility. "The Policy thus displaces consular officers from the role Congress assigned them in the visa issuance process," Vargas stated.
The administration had argued that the refusals were lawful as they were formally issued under Section 221(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, a provision governing visa refusals. Vargas rejected this, finding the government failed to cite a law that would allow an officer to deny a visa to an applicant already deemed eligible.
Vargas also found the policy violated the Immigration and Nationality Act's prohibition on nationality-based discrimination in immigrant visa issuance, as well as provisions allowing visa refusals only when an applicant is legally ineligible. The administration's approach, she wrote, created "pernicious distinctions based upon nationality."
The judge distinguished this case from the Supreme Court's 2018 ruling that upheld a previous travel ban, noting that the prior case involved presidential authority over who may enter the country, whereas this case concerned the State Department's authority to deny immigrant visas to otherwise eligible applicants.
The ruling invalidates visa denials based solely on the 75-country freeze but does not affect denials made on other independent grounds of ineligibility. The cases affected by the ruling will be returned to the government for further proceedings.
The lawsuit was filed by the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (CLINIC), African Communities Together (ACT), five prospective employment-based immigrants, and six U.S. citizens seeking to sponsor family members.