Mirbaha v. Pompeo


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MOOJAN MIRBAHA et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 20-299 (TJK) MICHAEL POMPEO et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Moojan Mirbaha and Nima Ebrahimi brought this action against various federal officials, seeking to compel the Government under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) or the Mandamus Act to finish processing Ebrahimi’s request for a waiver from Presidential Proclamation 9645, which otherwise bars him from receiving an immigration visa to join his fianceé in the United States. Before the Court is the Government’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. For the reasons explained below, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have established subject matter jurisdiction, but they have failed to state a claim. Thus, the Court will grant the motion and dismiss the case. Background The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq., governs admission of aliens into the United States. Admission normally requires a valid immigrant or nonimmigrant visa. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1181, 1182, 1203. Once a visa application is “completed and executed before a consular officer,” the “consular officer must issue the visa, refuse the visa . . . [or] discontinue granting the visa.” 22 C.F.R. § 42.81(a). Congress has delegated to the President broad authority to exclude aliens under the INA: Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f). On September 24, 2017, President Trump signed Proclamation No. 9645, 82 Fed. Reg. 45,161 (2017) (“Procl.”) under this authority. The Proclamation placed entry restrictions on Iranian citizens, among others, because the Secretary of Homeland Security found that country’s identity-management protocols and information-sharing practices relating to the screening of those seeking admission to the United States inadequate. Procl. § 2(b)(ii). Still, the Proclamation allows for case-by-case waivers for foreign nationals who show that (i) denying entry would cause undue hardship, (ii) entry would be in the national interest, and (iii) entry would not threaten the national security or public safety. Id. § 3(c)(i). Ebrahimi is an Iranian national who resides in Tehran, Iran. ECF No. 1 (“Compl.”) ¶ 6. He is engaged to be married to Mirbaha, a naturalized United States citizen who resides in Texas. Id. ¶ 13, 22. The couple met in 2006 while studying in Iran, but after completing her associate’s degree, Mirbaha moved to the United States and the two lost touch. Id. ¶ 12. Mirbaha and Ebrahimi reconnected in 2016 and became engaged on September 20, 2017. Id. ¶¶ 19, 22. On December 4, 2017, Mirbaha filed an I-129F, Petition for Alien Fiancé, with the United ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals