Law360 is providing free access to its coronavirus coverage to make sure all members of the legal community have accurate information in this time of uncertainty and change. Use the form below to sign up for any of our weekly newsletters. Signing up for any of our section newsletters will opt you in to the weekly Coronavirus briefing.
Sign up for our Immigration newsletter
You must correct or enter the following before you can sign up:
Thank You!
Law360 (June 9, 2020, 4:48 PM EDT) -- The Trump administration urged a D.C. federal judge to toss a challenge by American citizens and green card applicants to the president's green card ban, saying the plaintiffs can't connect holdups in their visa applications to the order.
The administration said Monday that missing application materials and the coronavirus-fueled shutdown of overseas consulates were the likely culprits for delays in processing green card applications or outright petition denials, not a presidential proclamation barring foreigners from securing permanent residency abroad.
"No plaintiff alleges that a consular officer has denied the visa applications at issue based on the proclamation, and the delays in adjudicating refused visa applications predate the proclamation," according to the motion to dismiss.
Some of the visa applications failed because of missing information, while live petitions were put on hold when the U.S. Department of State closed routine visa functions at its overseas embassies and consulates in response to the coronavirus, the administration explained to U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta.
"Given the shuttering of consulates, it's unlikely that [petitioners'] applications would be processed, they would get interviews, be found eligible and issued visas," the government argued.
Judge Mehta already reached this conclusion when he refused to block the green card ban in a May 18 hearing, the administration claimed.
During that hearing, Judge Mehta found that challengers hadn't shown that their immigration cases were halted because of President Donald Trump's green card proclamation, and that their standing to sue "fails right off the bat."
Additionally, the federal judge was unconvinced that an order blocking the green card ban would even help their visa applications.
In its Monday dismissal bid, the administration further argued that even if the challengers had evidence that Trump's ban killed their chances for a green card, they still couldn't knock down a presidential order meant to shield domestic interests.
Trump issued the order based on the skyrocketing unemployment rates for American citizens, who would otherwise have to compete against new immigrants for jobs, his administration claimed. Regardless of the order's effectiveness, the president has the discretion to order it, according to the filing.
Trump signed the executive order in April, barring relatives of U.S. permanent residents, American citizens' parents and diversity visa winners from entering the country, but exempting foreign investors, U.S. citizens' spouses and minor children, and health care workers.
In response, U.S. citizen Jessica Nguyen amended her pending suit over the delays of family members' visa applications to challenge the green card ban, arguing that the order is a "gross usurpation of Congress' power to regulate immigration."
Representatives for the challengers and the U.S. Department of Justice didn't immediately respond to Tuesday requests for comment.
The challengers are represented by James O. Hacking of Hacking Law Practice LLC.
The U.S. is represented by Joseph H. Hunt, William C. Peachey, Glenn M. Girdharry and Aaron S. Goldsmith of the DOJ's Civil Division.
The case is Nguyen et al. v. Trump et al., case number 1:20-cv-00718, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
--Additional reporting by Suzanne Monyak. Editing by Adam LoBelia.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
