World / U.S. Immigration | By Saqib S. Qureshi
NEW YORK — A US federal judge has struck down the Trump administration’s sweeping suspension of immigrant visa issuance for nationals of 75 countries, including Pakistan, ruling that the State Department’s nationality-based policy exceeded the authority granted to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and conflicted with federal immigration law. The decision removes a major legal barrier that had blocked thousands of people seeking permanent immigration to the United States through family- and employment-based visa routes.
US District Judge Jeannette Vargas of the Southern District of New York issued the ruling on Friday, August 21, describing the policy as “patently unlawful.” The State Department had announced the suspension in January and made it effective on January 21, 2026, stopping immigrant visa issuance for nationals of Pakistan and 74 other countries on the grounds that applicants from those countries were considered at higher risk of becoming dependent on US public benefits. The department’s own guidance confirmed that the measure applied to immigrant visa applicants based on nationality.
The lawsuit, CLINIC v. Rubio, was brought by immigrant-rights organisations including the Catholic Legal Immigration Network and African Communities Together, together with affected visa applicants and US citizens sponsoring relatives. The challengers argued that the State Department could conduct individual public-charge assessments but could not replace that process with a blanket nationality-based prohibition. Vargas agreed, finding that the policy violated the Immigration and Nationality Act’s restrictions on nationality discrimination in immigrant visa issuance and exceeded the secretary of state’s statutory and regulatory powers.
The ruling is particularly significant because this was not simply a temporary pause affecting embassy appointments. The January policy had effectively prevented immigrant visas from being issued to otherwise eligible nationals of the designated countries. Pakistan was included alongside countries across South Asia, Africa, the Middle East, Latin America, the Caribbean and the Balkans. The State Department had defended the measure as part of the administration’s effort to prevent immigrants considered likely to become a “public charge.”
Importantly, the policy concerned immigrant visas — visas leading to US permanent residence — rather than the ordinary nonimmigrant visa system as a whole. Student, visitor and other temporary visa categories were not automatically covered by this particular 75-country immigrant-visa suspension. That distinction is critical for Pakistani applicants because the ruling directly concerns permanent immigration processing rather than eliminating every other restriction or vetting policy affecting travel to the United States.
The Changer Angle: The Court Has Challenged Nationality as a Shortcut for Immigration Decisions
The deeper significance of the ruling is not simply that Pakistan has been removed from a 75-country freeze. The court rejected the government’s attempt to use nationality itself as a substitute for individual immigration assessment. US immigration law already allows consular officers to examine whether an individual applicant is likely to become a public charge. What the judge found unlawful was transforming that individual determination into a blanket presumption covering entire nationalities.
For Pakistani families and employment-based immigrants, that distinction could be substantial. Applicants still have to qualify for their visas, complete security and medical screening, satisfy financial requirements and overcome any individual ground of inadmissibility. The ruling does not guarantee anyone a green card or immigrant visa. What it removes is the blanket rule under which an otherwise eligible applicant could be denied issuance simply because Pakistan appeared on the 75-country list.
The decision also fits a broader pattern of federal courts scrutinising the administration’s efforts to reshape legal immigration through executive action. The government could appeal the ruling, meaning further litigation remains possible. But unless the decision is stayed or reversed, the legal foundation for the 75-country immigrant visa suspension has suffered a major defeat.
For Pakistan, the immediate headline is positive: the blanket immigrant-visa barrier has been struck down. The more important precedent, however, is broader. The administration can tighten screening and apply the public-charge law to individual applicants, but Friday’s ruling says it cannot simply treat millions of prospective immigrants as presumptively ineligible because of the passports they carry.