A federal judge in Washington has ruled that an ongoing green card freeze targeting applicants from 75 countries is unlawful, according to Bloomberglaw. Judge Amit Mehta of the US District Court for the District of Columbia issued an opinion on July 31 finding that the public charge policy implemented by Secretary of State Marco Rubio exercises authority specifically denied by Congress in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
Federal Judge Blocks State Department Public Charge Policy
The State Department policy, which was adopted in January, has blocked mostly family-based immigrant visa applicants as well as some employment-based green card seekers. Affected nations include Nigeria, Colombia, Russia, and Egypt. The measure was designed to address concerns that applicants from these 75 countries could become dependent on public benefits.
Judge Mehta wrote in his opinion, Under the Public Charge Policy, the Secretary of State is doing precisely what the INA prohibits: he is controlling individual visa application determinations.
The court held that the policy plainly nullifies the discretionary authority of consular officers on individual applications. Furthermore, the judge determined that the doctrine of consular nonreviewability does not block consideration of the case because the challenge targets a broader State Department policy rather than an individual consular decision.
Legal Challenge Brought by Brazilian Investor Visa Applicant
The ruling stems from a specific lawsuit filed against the State Department by Newton De Moura Gomes, a Brazilian national whose immigrant visa application through the EB-5 investor visa program was halted by the policy. As reported by Indiatimes, Gomes filed a complaint in May alleging multiple violations of the Administrative Procedure Act, including the unlawful withholding of an agency decision and maintaining a policy contrary to law.
Mehta agreed with the plaintiff and issued an order enjoining the State Department from applying the public charge policy to De Moura Gomes’ visa request. The order further requires the agency to adjudicate his application once it is deemed complete by a consular officer.
Edward Ramos, a partner at Kurzban Kurzban Tetzeli and Pratt P.A. and counsel for De Moura Gomes, praised the decision. We are pleased the Court recognized that the State Department cannot require individualized review and then dictate refusal regardless of the result,
Ramos said in a statement, adding that Congress entrusted visa decisions to consular officers applying the law to each case rather than a policy that stripped them of that judgment and predetermined the outcome.
Broader Legal Landscape and Government Response
The policy has faced multiple legal challenges in district courts across New York and Washington, D.C. While the judiciary has intervened in specific agency guidelines, the Department of Homeland Security has separately tightened its own public charge policies through final regulations issued in the month prior to the ruling.
A State Department spokesperson stated that the agency does not comment on ongoing litigation as a general matter, while maintaining that the Trump administration is upholding the highest standards of screening and vetting of visa applicants.
Читайте также
