The lawsuit against secretary of state Marco Rubio and the state department at large alleges the administration’s suspension of visa processing for nationals of near 40 countries under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) is unlawful.
The plaintiffs argue the INA allows the president to restrict immigrants from entering the US but that it does not permit the state department to halt visa processing “because of the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence”.
The case claims the state department’s implementation of Trump’s proclamations is “in excess” of its authority and violates US law which “does not permit [the] defendant to suspend the issuance of visas or deprive consular officers” of such powers.
The lawsuit relates to Trump’s June 4 and December 16 proclamations, which together prohibited the entry of nationals from 39 countries and the Palestinian Authority into the US, with both directives claiming to protect America from national security and public safety threats.
The Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration advocacy group said it was “encouraged” by the legal challenge but that it was too early to predict the outcome.
“The travel ban has created immediate uncertainty for students, scholars, and other campus community members and their families, and it has effectively closed the door on talented individuals from the impacted countries who want to study in the US,” said Zuzana Cepla Wootson, deputy director of federal policy at the Alliance.
She emphasised the “chilling effect” of the ban spread far beyond the countries on the list, labelling the policy a “self-inflicted wound” that directly undermined US economic competitiveness.
The initial ban, announced in June 2025, set full travel restrictions on nationals from 12 countries, subjecting a further seven to partial restrictions.
The chilling of this policy effect extends far beyond the countries on the list
Zuzana Cepla Wootson, Presidents’ Alliance
In December 2025, the administration added an additional 20 nations and the Palestinian Authority to the list, with international students and exchange visitors included in both full and partial bans.
State department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said every visa decision was a national security decision, adding the agency was “implementing the necessary procedures and vetting standards to best protect the American people”.
The plaintiffs in the case hail from 12 affected nations, with Iran and Syria the most represented countries. All the complainants have seen their visa applications refused, paused, or indefinitely placed in “administrative processing”, the lawsuit outlines.
They are calling on the judge to halt the state department’s sweeping suspension of visa issuance to nationals of the affected countries and order the immediate issuance of visas to plaintiffs who have been approved but who have not received their visas.
For those whose applications were denied, paused, or who are waiting for interviews, the case urges that appointments are expedited and documents re-issued.
