Court Compels State Department to Act on ‘Extraordinary Ability’ Visa Applications Stuck in Administrative Purgatory for Over a Year
A federal judge has denied a motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by three foreign nationals against U.S. Secretary of State, Marco Rubio.
The plaintiffs, who are seeking EB-1A visas for individuals with “extraordinary abilities,” sued the government over what they call unreasonable and unlawful delays in the adjudication of their visa applications. The court’s decision allows the case to proceed, compelling the State Department to provide a final decision on the long-pending applications.
READ: Appeals Court Upholds E. Jean Carroll’s $83.3 Million Defamation Award Against Trump
The case, Lyazat Tolymbekova, et al. v. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, et al., centers on three plaintiffs—a Kazakh metallurgist, a Russian project manager, and a Russian make-up artist—whose EB-1A visa applications have been in administrative processing for more than 16 months. The plaintiffs’ applications were placed in this status under § 221(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which allows a consular officer to refuse a visa when additional information is needed.
The plaintiffs argue that this prolonged administrative processing has caused significant personal and professional hardships. Lyazat Tolymbekova, for example, has been separated from her U.S. citizen daughter and was unable to attend her daughter’s college graduation or be with her during a medical crisis. The other plaintiffs have also had to put their careers and family plans on hold due to the uncertainty surrounding their visa status.
READ: Texas Rep. Jasmine Crockett Levels Major Accusations Against Trump Amid Epstein Files Push
In its motion to dismiss, the government argued that the court lacked jurisdiction under the doctrine of consular nonreviewability, which typically shields a consular officer’s final visa decision from judicial review.
However, the court rejected this argument, stating that a § 221(g) refusal is not a final decision because the State Department’s own website tells applicants that they will receive another adjudication after the processing is complete. The judge emphasized that the doctrine of nonreviewability only applies to final decisions.
The court also dismissed the government’s claim of sovereign immunity, finding that the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) waives this immunity in cases where plaintiffs seek injunctive relief, not monetary damages. The judge concluded that the State Department has a “clear, nondiscretionary duty” to either issue or refuse a visa once an application is properly completed, a duty the agency has failed to meet in this case.
READ: Trump Calls On Foreign Companies To “Hire And Train Americans” After Massive Georgia ICE Raid
The judge pointed to the State Department’s own regulations, which require consular officers to act on applications and provide a final decision. The judge also cited the Accardi doctrine, which holds that administrative agencies are bound to follow their own rules and procedures.
This ruling sets the stage for a more detailed legal battle over the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims. The judge declined to rule on whether the delays were “unreasonable” but is allowing the case to move forward, which could lead to a court order compelling the government to issue a final decision.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Connect with us: Follow the Tampa Free Press on Facebook and Twitter for breaking news and updates.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox.
