...
By Nick Mordowanec
Staff Writer
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
Dozens of Iranian employment-based green card applicants filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleging that a new presidential travel ban has unlawfully derailed their immigration process.
Why This Matters
The plaintiffs allege that although the ban theoretically allows for national interest exceptions, in practice, none have been granted to date. The complaint forms part of a broader legal pushback against recent Trump administration immigration measures, which have included heightened scrutiny of green card applicants and sweeping changes to application procedures.
Read More
Climate Activists Use Supreme Court’s Samuel Alito’s Words to Boost Lawsuit4 min read
Dan Osborn’s Chances of Beating Republican Pete Ricketts in Nebraska4 min read
Republican Backs Push to Repeal Part of Trump Bill Days After Voting For It4 min read
A U.S. State Department spokesperson told Newsweek on Tuesday that the department does not comment on pending or ongoing litigation.
"We also cannot preview future visa-related decisions, which are made on a case-by-case basis, based on the individual facts relevant to each case," the spokesperson said.
Newsweek reached out to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) for comment via email.
What To Know
The legal complaint, submitted on Friday, challenges a proclamation issued by President Donald Trump on June 4, which restricts entry to the United States for individuals from Iran and 18 other countries.
The pending case, Ariani v. Blinken, asks the court to compel the State Department to adjudicate applications that, according to the plaintiffs, should not be blocked while the ban is being challenged.
The group of 58 plaintiffs includes pilots, medical researchers and experts in artificial intelligence and machine learning—sectors often highlighted as critical to U.S. innovation and national interest—according to Bloomberg Law. Despite having completed consular interviews, these individuals remain in limbo because of administrative delays compounded by the travel ban.
...
Lawyers for the group, represented by immigration attorneys at Red Eagle Law LC in San Diego, said the Department of Homeland Security had already deemed the plaintiffs' entry to be in the national interest; however, they have faced indefinite postponement and uncertainty.
Curtis Morrison, an immigration attorney and owner of Red Eagle Law, told Newsweek that he has represented the same families in this lawsuit since it was originally filed on May 31, 2024.
As of then, all of these visa applicants had attended visa interviews, but none had been given decisions because they were stuck in "administrative processing" related to national security vetting.
Aside from the 58 plaintiffs in this suit, he represents hundreds of Iranian nationals in 70-plus other lawsuits.
"My level of confidence is high that Judge [Tanya] Chutkan will give due consideration to our request for leave to amend our complaint, as justice requires judicial oversight of executive branch policies," Morrison said.
One of the causes of action in the amended complaint—the fact that the legal provision 212(f) only gives authority for an entry ban and not an issuance ban—is an issue she's ruled on before in visa applicant plaintiffs' favor in 2021, which was also Morrison's case.
He said the goal of the litigation is "to enjoin unlawful policies that [are] impacting my plaintiffs. It's not about getting visas recognized because no visas have been issued."
Travel Ban and National Interest Exception
The president's June proclamation, which updated already strict vetting policies, said exceptions would be made for those whose U.S. entry served the national interest.
However, the lawsuit alleges that not one exception has been processed for this plaintiff group, creating a de facto blanket ban.
Broader Changes Affecting Green Card Seekers
The Trump administration has rolled out additional policy changes affecting legal immigrants.
On June 11, USCIS instituted a rule requiring all green card applicants to submit a renewed medical examination form with their applications, regardless of prior compliance. The adjustment, which immediately went into effect, removed previous grace periods and could require applicants caught in administrative delays to repeat medical exams, at an extra cost of $100 to $500 per test.
Legal Backdrop: Multiple Lawsuits Challenge Administration's Immigration Moves
The complaint by the Iranian green card applicants joins a series of legal actions brought against the Trump administration's immigration executive orders and policies.
These include challenges to travel bans, restrictions on health coverage and procedural barriers that lawyers argue violate established statutes or constitutional protections.
What People Are Saying
Attorney Garrett May, who represents plaintiffs, said in a statement: "In 1776, independence was declared by those that penned their collective claim to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Today, a group of immigrant plaintiffs bear the same banner of freedom against the tyrannical immigration policies of Trump and his new travel ban."
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services wrote on X (formerly Twitter) on May 5: "Green cards and visas will be revoked if an alien breaks the law."
It said in a later post: "USCIS works alongside our @DHSgov and @StateDept partners each day to keep America, and Americans, safe. From designating foreign terrorist organizations to imposing sanctions, we're taking action to protect and secure our nation for your families, friends, and future."
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in March: "If you apply for a student visa to come to the United States and you say you're coming not just to study, but to participate in movements that vandalize universities, harass students, take over buildings, and cause chaos, we're not giving you that visa."
What Happens Next
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia is set to decide whether the State Department must review the plaintiffs' applications and whether the travel ban can be reversed or amended for national interest waivers.
The outcome may influence other pending cases where legal immigrants allege that new Trump administration directives have unlawfully disrupted their paths to permanent residency.
Update 7/8/25, 12:52 p.m. ET: This story was updated with comment from the U.S. State Department.
Update 7/8/25, 2:52 p.m. ET: This story was updated with comment from Curtis Morrison and a statement from Garrett May.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines