A federal judge has struck down a U.S. administration policy that suspended the issuance of immigrant visas to nationals of 75 countries, ruling that the State Department exceeded its legal authority by imposing the restriction on the basis of nationality.
District Judge Jeannette Vargas of Manhattan issued the ruling on Friday, finding the policy “patently unlawful” and incompatible with the statutory framework governing immigrant-visa decisions.
Major U.S. ally Pakistan, and South Asia’s third largest populated country Bangladesh were among nations covered by the policy, along with nations across Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Caribbean, the Middle East and the Balkans.
The decision removes the legal basis for the nationality-based suspension that had been in effect since January, as part of President Donald Trump ‘s effort to streamline the immigration process.
🚨 A federal judge has struck down the Trump administration’s suspension of immigrant visas for nationals of 75 countries, ruling the State Department policy violates federal immigration law and exceeds Secretary Marco Rubio’s authority. pic.twitter.com/GPRez33uI6
— SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) August 22, 2026
It does not, however, mean that every affected applicant will automatically receive an immigrant visa. Applicants must still meet the normal requirements for immigration to the United States, and the administration could seek further judicial review.
What the policy did
The State Department announced in January that it would pause immigrant-visa issuance for nationals of 75 countries while it reassessed how it determined whether prospective immigrants were likely to become dependent on public assistance.
The measure took effect on January 21. The department said it applied to immigrant visas, the category used by people seeking to move permanently to the United States. It did not constitute a general suspension of US visas, and non-immigrant categories such as visitor visas were not covered by the policy.
US pausing immigrant visa processing for 75 countries, including Pakistan
Applicants from the affected countries could continue with parts of the application process, including submitting applications and attending interviews, but the State Department paused issuance of their immigrant visas.
The administration justified the policy on so-called public-charge concerns — the possibility that an immigrant could become primarily dependent on government assistance.
The legal question before the court
The lawsuit challenged the government’s decision to apply that standard collectively to nationals of entire countries rather than assessing applicants within the framework established by federal immigration law.
Vargas agreed with the challengers that the State Department could not use the nationality-based policy to replace that statutory process.
“The Policy, which categorically prohibits the issuance of immigrant visas based upon the nationality of the applicant, represents a direct abrogation of this statutory scheme,” Vargas wrote.
Trump Administration Exempts Foreign Doctors in US From Immigration Freeze
The court also concluded that the policy exceeded Secretary of State’s statutory and regulatory authority. The litigation was brought by immigrant-rights organizations, affected visa applicants and U.S. citizens seeking to sponsor family members.
The plaintiffs argued that the policy also conflicted with the Immigration and Nationality Act’s restrictions on nationality-based discrimination in visa issuance. The National Immigration Law Center described Friday’s ruling as a rejection of the administration’s nationality-based approach to immigrant-visa processing.
What it could mean for applicants
For families affected by the January suspension, the ruling could reopen an immigration pathway that had been interrupted for months.
That does not amount to automatic approval. An applicant must still establish eligibility and satisfy the other requirements applicable to an immigrant visa.
The immediate practical question is how the State Department will implement the judgment and whether it will seek to challenge the decision in a higher court.
The department had not publicly commented on the ruling in the immediate aftermath of Friday’s decision.
The case is the latest legal challenge to the Trump administration’s efforts to reshape U.S. immigration policy through restrictions on entry, visa processing and eligibility.
But the ruling should not be confused with other U.S. immigration restrictions imposed by the administration. The 75-country measure dealt specifically with immigrant-visa issuance.
Other presidential policies affecting entry and different visa categories remain separate matters.
That distinction is important for applicants and travelers: Friday’s ruling does not amount to a general lifting of all US immigration or travel restrictions.
Iftikhar Ali is a veteran Pakistani journalist, former president of UN Correspondents Association, and a recipient of the Pride of Performance civil award
