Disclaimer: We assist with federal U.S. immigration (USCIS) matters only. Attorney Scott A. Maki is licensed in Minnesota only and cannot assist with state-law matters in any other state, including North Dakota.
Status as of September 26, 2026: The 75-country immigrant visa ban is still blocked. On September 25, Judge Jeannette A. Vargas denied the government’s request to stay (pause) her ruling while it appeals, so the court’s judgment striking down the visa pause stays in effect. The government has said it intends to ask the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit for a stay; as of today, no Second Circuit stay has been granted. The court is also considering whether to set a firm deadline for the State Department to finish re-deciding the refused immigrant visa applications.
What is the 75-country immigrant visa ban?
In January 2026, the State Department paused immigrant visa processing for people from 75 countries, citing “public charge” concerns. Immigrant visas are how many relatives of U.S. citizens and green card holders come to the United States through a consulate abroad, so the pause affected many family-based cases.
The Catholic Legal Immigration Network (CLINIC), African Communities Together, and several affected individuals sued the State Department and Secretary of State Marco Rubio in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:26-cv-00858), before Judge Jeannette A. Vargas.
CLINIC v. Rubio timeline
- February 2, 2026: Lawsuit filed.
- August 21, 2026: The court struck down the policy, finding it exceeded the State Department’s authority and violated the Immigration and Nationality Act’s ban on nationality-based discrimination in immigrant visas.
- Late August 2026: After reports that visa interviews were still being canceled, the plaintiffs asked the court to enforce its order. On August 31, the court granted the request in part and required the government to report on compliance.
- September 8, 2026: A government status report disclosed that more than 43,000 visa applications had been refused under the policy.
- September 10, 2026: The government filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (No. 26-2573).
- September 14, 2026: The government asked the district court to stay its judgment pending appeal.
- September 17, 2026: The government said it also intends to ask the Second Circuit for a stay.
- September 23, 2026: The court ordered the plaintiffs to respond to the stay request by September 25.
- September 24, 2026: The plaintiffs filed their opposition to the government’s stay request (ECF No. 107). They argue the government is unlikely to win on appeal and will not suffer irreparable harm, and they point to government filings in a related case (Medani v. Trump, N.D. Cal.) stating that visas affected by the ruling are still not being issued while new public-charge reviews are rolled out.
- September 24, 2026: The court issued an order to show cause (ECF No. 108). The judge noted that the government had earlier told the court it would not redo the public-charge analysis for these applicants, but its September 8 report said remanded cases would be reconsidered under current public-charge guidance with no fixed completion date. Finding “some doubt” that the government is complying with the judgment, the court ordered the parties to show cause why an injunction should not issue requiring the government to complete its decisions on the remanded applications by a date certain.
- September 25, 2026: The court denied the government’s motion to stay the judgment pending appeal (ECF No. 109). The judge found the government’s arguments on appeal “largely insubstantial” and that it had not shown it would suffer irreparable harm without a stay, noting that about 43,000 applicants had already been found eligible for visas before the policy was applied to them.
What the visa ban ruling means for your family’s immigrant visa
If a relative’s immigrant visa was refused or their interview was canceled under this policy, their case may be affected by the ruling. Because the court denied a stay, the ruling remains in effect for now. The government can still ask the Second Circuit to pause it, so the situation could change quickly.
If your family member is from one of the affected countries, contact our immigration lawyer to talk through your options. For other recent changes, see our family immigration news page. Keep copies of any refusal notices or interview cancellation emails.
Sources
- District court docket (CourtListener)
- National Immigration Law Center case page
- Center for Constitutional Rights case page
- Plaintiffs’ opposition to the stay motion, ECF No. 107 (September 24, 2026)
- Order to show cause on a completion deadline, ECF No. 108 (September 24, 2026)
- Opinion and order denying stay pending appeal, ECF No. 109 (September 25, 2026)
- Second Circuit appeal docket, No. 26-2573 (CourtListener)
- CLINIC press release on the August 21 ruling
This update provides general information, not legal advice. Court cases change quickly; check back for the latest status.