F2A Spouse of US permanent resident - Proclamation 10014

[nailaabad 1]

I am permanent resident living in usa . My husband had interview in Islamabad usa embassy on March 24th which got cancelled few days before his appointment and now we have proclamation 10014 preventing immigrants to get visa. Want to know if there are any active lawsuits In the court currently against this proclamation seeking exception for family members or spouse of permanent residents under proclamation 10014? I have heard mandamus writ can work in my case but i am not sure . Would appreciate if someone can share information.

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

The only thing a mandamus writ does as far as i know is force a decision, which would be a denial right now because of the ban. There was an AILA class action lawsuit filed yesterday against the proclamation. 

[nailaabad 1]

1 minute ago, SusieQQQ said:

The only thing a mandamus writ does as far as i know is force a decision, which would be a denial right now because of the ban. There was an AILA class action lawsuit filed yesterday against the proclamation. 

Do you have information on that lawsuit if it is filed in against the entire proclamation 10014 or specific group or category of visa class in proclamation 10014.🙏

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

I believe it is for everyone affected by the ban.

[designguy 1,179]

40 minutes ago, nailaabad said:

My husband had interview in Islamabad usa embassy on March 24th which got cancelled few days before his appointment

So he hasnt interviewed, correct?

[geowrian 22,337]

Agreed - a WoM could only force a decision, not a positive one. Under the current EO, the only decision they could reach is a refusal under INA 212(f).

 

As noted, lawsuits have been filed. It's impossible to know how they will rule, but honestly I think they have very little chance of success at this time. Previous lawsuits against the prior EO (before it was extended) were all dismissed without ever getting to the merits of the case, based entirely on a lack of standing. Nobody (or at least nobody the lawyers have found) has actually been refused a visa under EO since routine visa processing has been suspended. As such, it's a ban on the books but isn't actually the cause of any refusal yet.

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

2 hours ago, geowrian said:

Agreed - a WoM could only force a decision, not a positive one. Under the current EO, the only decision they could reach is a refusal under INA 212(f).

 

As noted, lawsuits have been filed. It's impossible to know how they will rule, but honestly I think they have very little chance of success at this time. Previous lawsuits against the prior EO (before it was extended) were all dismissed without ever getting to the merits of the case, based entirely on a lack of standing. Nobody (or at least nobody the lawyers have found) has actually been refused a visa under EO since routine visa processing has been suspended. As such, it's a ban on the books but isn't actually the cause of any refusal yet.

At least for one case, it was dismissed because there was no permanent damage, just a delay, caused by the first ban. Now that it is extended past fiscal year end there will be permanent damage to diversity visa 2020 selectees, some are hoping they’ll get an injunction. Not sure necessarily why the situation would be different for other categories though.

[geowrian 22,337]

1 hour ago, SusieQQQ said:

At least for one case, it was dismissed because there was no permanent damage, just a delay, caused by the first ban. Now that it is extended past fiscal year end there will be permanent damage to diversity visa 2020 selectees, some are hoping they’ll get an injunction. Not sure necessarily why the situation would be different for other categories though.

Yes, assuming one can show that if it weren't for the ban then it would have had a different result. That's the hard part...DV is not considered mission critical at this time.

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

35 minutes ago, geowrian said:

Yes, assuming one can show that if it weren't for the ban then it would have had a different result. That's the hard part...DV is not considered mission critical at this time.

The argument is there will be permanent damage as the 2020 selectees lose their chance entirely on 30 September. Similar argument as was used originally to those who would age out, and that got added in as an exemption in the second ban. Anyway, will be interesting to see the outcome. Even if the lawsuit is successful there just isn’t enough time left to process all the outstanding 2020 selectees so I guess the policy would still be considered a “success” from the administration’s perspective.

[nailaabad 1]

Want to know if someone filed emergency/ expedite request to get interview at consulate due to financial/emotional hardship or any other reason and request granted by the consulate or NVC while presidential proclamation is in effect. Would appreciate if fellow members can share their experiences. Thanks

 

 

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

13 minutes ago, nailaabad said:

Want to know if someone filed emergency/ expedite request to get interview at consulate due to financial/emotional hardship or any other reason and request granted by the consulate or NVC while presidential proclamation is in effect. Would appreciate if fellow members can share their experiences. Thanks

 

 

You would need to fall under one of the exceptions to the proclamation example medical personnel. Normal expedite criteria are not exemptions to the proclamation. 

[nailaabad 1]

Under presidential proclamation 10014 It’s not very clear what is considered as exception . I have been living apart from my husband with my US citizen daughter 3.5 years who is being affected from this long separation from her father. And I am also going through stress and under therapies from psychiatrist. I am not sure if it would be considered as criteria for exemptions if proved with supporting documents from my daughters school and my doctor.

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

37 minutes ago, nailaabad said:

Under presidential proclamation 10014 It’s not very clear what is considered as exception . I have been living apart from my husband with my US citizen daughter 3.5 years who is being affected from this long separation from her father. And I am also going through stress and under therapies from psychiatrist. I am not sure if it would be considered as criteria for exemptions if proved with supporting documents from my daughters school and my doctor.

I’m truly sorry for your situation, and under “normal” circumstances these might qualify for expedite (I am not sure). Unfortunately this is not a normal situation, humanitarian factors do not seem to matter,  and these kind of situations do not fall under the exceptions.  (Your USC daughter of course can go back to live with her father anytime - of course I understand you don’t want to be separated from her, but that would be the response from immigration. )

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/News/visas-news/proclamation-suspending-entry-of-immigrants-and-nonimmigrants-who-present-risk-to-the-US-labor-market-during-the-economic-recovery-following-the-COVID-19-outbreak.html

applicants who may be eligible for an exception under these presidential proclamations, such as: IR/CR1, IR/CR2, IR/IH-3, IR/IH-4, SQ, SI, certain medical professionals, and certain aliens providing temporary labor or services essential to the United States food supply chain, as well as cases involving an applicant who may age out of his or her visa category.  

 

Edited September 10, 2020 by SusieQQQ

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

On 7/18/2020 at 9:32 PM, geowrian said:

Yes, assuming one can show that if it weren't for the ban then it would have had a different result. That's the hard part...DV is not considered mission critical at this time.

Oh reading back up saw this... you may have seen DV2020 just got declared mission critical with the judgement, unfortunately none of the other categories got relief as there is no permanent danger to their visas.

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

12 minutes ago, SusieQQQ said:

I’m truly sorry for your situation, and under “normal” circumstances these might qualify for expedite (I am not sure). Unfortunately this is not a normal situation, humanitarian factors do not seem to matter,  and these kind of situations do not fall under the exceptions.  (Your USC daughter of course can go back to live with her father anytime - of course I understand you don’t want to be separated from her, but that would be the response from immigration. )

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/News/visas-news/proclamation-suspending-entry-of-immigrants-and-nonimmigrants-who-present-risk-to-the-US-labor-market-during-the-economic-recovery-following-the-COVID-19-outbreak.html

applicants who may be eligible for an exception under these presidential proclamations, such as: IR/CR1, IR/CR2, IR/IH-3, IR/IH-4, SQ, SI, certain medical professionals, and certain aliens providing temporary labor or services essential to the United States food supply chain, as well as cases involving an applicant who may age out of his or her visa category.  

 

Sorry the full list of exemptions is actually this, same link as above

 

 These exceptions include: certain healthcare professionals, aliens seeking to enter the United States pursuant to an EB-5 investor visa, spouses and children (categories IR1, CR1, IR2, CR2, IR3, IH3, IR4, IH4) of U.S. citizens, members of the United States Armed Forces and any spouse and children of a member of the United States Armed Forces, aliens seeking to enter the United States pursuant to an Afghan and Iraqi Special Immigrant Visa (SQ or SI-SIV), any alien seeking to provide temporary labor services essential the United States food supply chain, and any alien whose entry would be in the national interest as determined by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or their respective designees.  In addition, the proclamation explicitly states that cases involving a child applicant who may age out may be considered for a national interest exception.  

Edited September 10, 2020 by SusieQQQ