Judge Amit Mehta ruled that the Green Card ban for 75 countries is illegal.
The ongoing Green Card freeze on 75 countries received a blow from a district court as Indian-American judge Amit Mehta, who was appointed by former president Barack Obama, called it illegal. The public charge policy issued by Secretary of State Marco Rubio is an exercise of authority specifically denied by Congress in the Immigration and Nationality Act, Judge Amit Mehta of the US District Court for the District of Columbia held in a July 31 opinion, Bloomberg reported.This is, however, not the first blow to the rule. There are multiple lawsuits in New York and DC district courts against the State Department policy that came into effect in January this year. Countries with people who are likely to use US welfare and therefore are likely to become a burden on the administration are on the ban list.In this particular lawsuit, Newton De Moura Gomes, a Brazilian national, sued the State Department after the policy halted his application for an immigrant visa through the EB-5 investor visa program. His May complaint alleged multiple violations of the Administrative Procedure Act, including unlawful withholding of an agency decision and policy contrary to law. Mehta agreed, the Bloomberg report said.“Under the Public Charge Policy, the Secretary of State is doing precisely what the INA prohibits: he is controlling individual visa application determinations,” Mehta wrote.The policy plainly nullifies discretionary authority of consular officers on individual applications, he wrote. Mehta also found that the doctrine of consular non-reviewability, which generally shields those decisions from judicial review, does not block consideration of the case because it challenged a State Department policy.His order enjoined the State Department from applying the public charge policy to De Moura Gomes’ visa request and from adjudicating his application when it’s deemed complete by a consular officer.The State Department policy is blatantly unlawful and fundamentally unfair, said Edward Ramos, a partner at Kurzban Kurzban Tetzeli and Pratt P.A. and counsel for De Moura Gomes.“We are pleased the Court recognized that the State Department cannot require individualized review and then dictate refusal regardless of the result,” he said in a statement. “Congress entrusted visa decisions to consular officers applying the law to each case. This policy stripped them of that judgment and predetermined the outcome.”A State Department spokesperson told Bloomberg that the agency doesn’t comment on ongoing litigation as a general matter, but added that the Trump administration is “upholding the highest standards of screening and vetting of visa applicants.”
