Federal Court Vacates 75-Country Immigrant Visa Suspension
A federal judge has struck down the State Department’s policy suspending immigrant visa issuance to nationals of 75 countries, finding that the policy violated federal immigration law and exceeded the Secretary of State’s statutory authority.
The August 21, 2026 decision in Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (CLINIC) v. Rubio removes a significant barrier that has affected both family- and employment-based immigrant visa applicants since the policy took effect on January 21, 2026.
The 75-Country Policy
In January, the Department of State directed U.S. consular officers to refuse immigrant visas to nationals of 75 designated countries while the government reviewed its public-charge screening policies.
The directive applied regardless of whether a consular officer had individually determined that an applicant was not likely to become a public charge and was otherwise eligible for an immigrant visa. As the court noted, the policy effectively barred immigrant visa issuance to nationals of nearly 40% of the world’s countries.
The list included countries such as Brazil, Colombia, India [NOTE: India is NOT on the court’s list—remove], Nigeria, Pakistan, Thailand and numerous countries throughout Africa, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Asia, the Caribbean and Latin America.
Why the Court Struck It Down
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York concluded that the policy conflicted with several provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Most significantly, federal law provides that a person may not be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of nationality, race, sex, place of birth or place of residence. The court concluded that the State Department policy did exactly that by directing consular officers to refuse visas based on an applicant’s nationality.
The court also found that the Secretary of State exceeded his statutory authority by directing consular officers to refuse visas to applicants whom the officers had otherwise determined were eligible. Under the INA, the authority to grant or refuse individual visa applications rests with consular officers.
What Changes Now
The court vacated the 75-country policy in its entirety, rather than limiting relief to the individuals who brought the lawsuit.
Importantly, the court also set aside immigrant visa refusals that were based solely on the 75-country policy and directed that those applications be returned for further adjudication. This does not mean those visas must now be issued. Consular officers retain authority to determine whether each applicant qualifies for an immigrant visa and whether any other ground of inadmissibility applies.
For employers sponsoring foreign nationals for permanent residence through consular processing, the decision removes the categorical nationality-based restriction that had prevented otherwise qualified applicants from receiving immigrant visas. Employers with affected employees—including individuals whose immigrant visas were previously refused solely under the policy—should review those cases to determine the appropriate next steps.
nding litigation, and additional claims remain before the court. The government may also pursue further review of the ruling. For now, however, the court’s order vacates the 75-country immigrant visa suspension and restores individualized adjudication of affected immigrant visa applications.