ARTICLE
31 August 2026

Federal Judge Reinstates Immigrant Visa Processing For 75 Countries

BT
Barnes & Thornburg LLP

Contributor

In a changing marketplace, Barnes & Thornburg stands ready at a moment’s notice, adapting with agility and precision to achieve your goals. As one of the 100 largest law firms in the United States, our 800 legal professionals in 23 offices put their collective experience to work so you can succeed.
A federal district court has struck down the U.S. Department of State's prohibition on immigrant visa issuance to nationals of 75 countries, finding it violates federal immigration law and the Administrative Procedure Act. The ruling requires the Department to resume visa processing for affected individuals, though the decision remains subject to appeal or potential stay.
Worldwide Immigration
Barnes & Thornburg LLP are most popular:
  • within Privacy and Accounting and Audit topic(s)

Highlights

  • A federal district court declared the prohibition of visa issuance by the U.S. Department of State (Department) to nationals of 75 countries violates federal immigration law and the Administrative Procedure Act.
  • For now, the Department must resume and reconsider immigrant visa issuance for nationals of the affected countries based on the ban.
  • The decision remains subject to appeal or further action, such as a stay to preclude the implementation of the decision.

On Aug. 28, the Southern District of New York effectively reinstated immigrant visa processing for inpiduals from 75 countries previously subject to a January 2026 visa ban implemented by the Department.

Preceding this decision, the Department announced in January its planned suspension of the issuance of immigrant visas, commonly referred to as “green cards,” for nationals of 75 countries. The Secretary of State immediately notified employees of the Department to cease issuance of visas to nationals of the listed countries, which included the following:

  • Afghanistan
  • Albania
  • Algeria
  • Antigua and Barbuda
  • Armenia
  • Azerbaijan
  • Bahamas
  • Bangladesh
  • Barbados
  • Belarus
  • Belize
  • Bhutan
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina
  • Brazil
  • Burma
  • Cambodia
  • Cameroon
  • Cape Verde
  • Colombia
  • Cote d'Ivoire
  • Cuba
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo
  • Dominica
  • Egypt
  • Eritrea
  • Ethiopia
  • Fiji
  • The Gambia
  • Georgia
  • Ghana
  • Grenada
  • Guatemala
  • Guinea
  • Haiti
  • Iran
  • Iraq
  • Jamaica
  • Jordan
  • Kazakhstan
  • Kosovo
  • Kuwait
  • Kyrgyz Republic
  • Laos
  • Lebanon
  • Liberia
  • Libya
  • Moldova
  • Mongolia
  • Montenegro
  • Morocco
  • Nepal
  • Nicaragua
  • Nigeria
  • North Macedonia
  • Pakistan
  • Republic of the Congo
  • Russia
  • Rwanda
  • Saint Kitts and Nevis
  • Saint Lucia
  • Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
  • Senegal
  • Sierra Leone
  • Somalia
  • South Sudan
  • Sudan
  • Syria
  • Tanzania
  • Thailand
  • Togo
  • Tunisia
  • Uganda
  • Uruguay
  • Uzbekistan
  • Yemen

The Department classified such inpiduals as likely to pose a high risk of becoming a public charge or using welfare programs in the United States, and in practice, the overnight change prohibited the issuance of immigrant visas to nationals of nearly 40% of the world’s countries.

In its decision, the court relied upon the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) as it recognized the policy to be contrary to law and implemented in a manner that exceeded the authority of the U.S. Secretary of State. In particular, the court stated that the nationality-based visa ban lacks consistency with the law given the mandate to consular officers to refuse a visa absent a finding of inadmissibility under the inadmissibility grounds listed at Section 1182. The decision also identified the Department’s policy as one that appropriates the authority specifically granted to consular officers by statute.

With the most recent judicial action, the adjudication of visas on behalf of inpiduals from the listed nations returns to the hands of consular officers typically tasked with such decisions. However, the decision remains subject to appeal. The Department may also pursue a stay of the decision, which would prohibit its implementation. Moreover, given the court’s references to a lack of specificity in the Department’s direction to consular officers, it is possible the Department will issue new guidance that addresses the court’s stated limitations of authority.

Provided the decision holds, nationals of the 75 nations who received a notice of visa refusal pursuant to 221(g) between Jan. 21 and Aug. 21, or impacted employers, should contact legal counsel to assess next steps and evaluate evolving guidance from the Department, including whether impacted cases will be reviewed automatically.

Tieranny Cutler contributed to this alert.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More