Federal judge lifts suspension of immigrant visas for 75 countries: what changes now
- Martha Salgado
- Aug 22
- 7 min read
Updated: 2 days ago
Updated: August 31, 2026
The U.S. Department of State has officially confirmed that, as of August 21, 2026, the immigrant visa issuance pause affecting nationals of 75 countries is no longer in effect, in accordance with the court’s order in CLINIC et al. v. Rubio.
The Department also confirmed that nationals of the previously affected countries may submit immigrant visa applications, attend their interviews, and that the Department will continue scheduling immigrant visa interviews.
This update applies specifically to the 75-country pause. It does not eliminate individual public charge determinations or other immigration restrictions that may apply, including certain presidential proclamations.
Separately, the Department of State has also begun a global training initiative for consular officers, and immigrant visa appointments have been adjusted to accommodate that training. This is separate from the 75-country suspension and does not mean that the suspension has returned.
Would you prefer to watch it on video first?
On August 21, 2026 , Federal Judge Jeannette A. Vargas , of the Federal Court for the Southern District of New York, issued a decision in the case Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (CLINIC) v. Rubio .
The court determined that the policy by which the State Department had suspended the issuance of immigrant visas for nationals of 75 countries was illegal and exceeded the authority that Congress had granted to the Secretary of State.
Judge Vargas not only ruled in favor of the people who filed the lawsuit, but she also overturned the policy itself.
How did the immigrant visa suspension for 75 countries begin?
Let's remember what had happened
Since January 21, 2026 , the State Department had implemented the suspension of immigrant visas for 75 countries.
These included countries such as Colombia, Brazil, Uruguay, Guatemala, Cuba, Jamaica, and countries in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, and the Middle East .
The State Department's argument was that nationals of those countries presented a high risk of becoming dependent on public benefits or becoming a "public charge" in the United States.
During the suspension, affected individuals could continue submitting their applications, attending consular interviews, and even completing much of the processing. What was suspended was the issuance of immigrant visas . The State Department itself further explained that the policy did not affect tourist visas or other nonimmigrant visas.
The complete list of affected countries remains available in the original State Department publication. See the official list of 75 countries at Travel.State.gov
What exactly did the judge decide?
Judge Vargas's decision is based on a very important principle of U.S. immigration law.
The Immigration and Nationality Act , at 8 USC §1152(a)(1)(A), states that a person may not receive preference or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of his or her race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence .
In addition, the law assigns consular officers the function of reviewing applications and determining individually whether a person is eligible or inadmissible.
The court concluded that the Secretary of State could not substitute a blanket order for individual review, requiring consular officers to deny visa applications based solely on a person's nationality, and that the policy directly contradicted the system established by Congress. Reuters reported that the judge called the measure "patently unlawful."
The court's decision does not eliminate the grounds for inadmissibility due to public charge established in immigration law.
Consular officers may continue to assess whether an applicant could become a public charge when that provision is applicable to their case, but they cannot use a person's nationality as an automatic ban for all nationals of a country .
In simple terms, we could see it like this:
What happens to those who have already received a negative response under this policy?
This is probably one of the most important parts of the decision.
The court also ordered that visa denials based solely on this policy be reversed and that those cases be returned for further processing.
This means that a person whose visa was rejected solely because they were covered by the 75-country suspension can have their application reconsidered under the normal rules.
This is especially important for employment visas; among the claimants were also Colombian professionals seeking employment-based immigrant visas , as well as U.S. citizens trying to reunite with family members from other affected countries.
That's why this decision is also important for our EB-1, EB-2, EB-2 NIW and other employment-based categories community.
Does this mean that all restrictions for those countries have disappeared?
Neither.
This decision specifically refers to the State Department policy that suspended the issuance of immigrant visas for 75 countries under the public charge argument .
There are other independent immigration policies, including certain presidential proclamations and restrictions related to national security, that may affect some countries.
For example, Presidential Proclamation 10998 established total or partial restrictions for certain nationals of 39 countries. That is a separate measure, and this court decision does not automatically mean that those restrictions have been lifted.
What has the Department of State now confirmed?
When I originally published this article on August 22, 2026, the Department of State had not yet updated its official webpage to reflect Judge Vargas’s decision. At that time, one major question remained: How would the government implement the ruling?
That has now changed.
On August 28, 2026, the Department of State officially updated its guidance and confirmed that the January pause has not been in effect since August 21, 2026, in accordance with the court’s order in CLINIC et al. v. Rubio.
The Department also confirmed that nationals of the previously affected countries may submit immigrant visa applications and attend their interviews, and that it will continue scheduling immigrant visa interviews.
This is important because we are no longer dealing only with a court decision waiting to be implemented: the Department of State itself now officially recognizes that the 75-country pause has ended.
However, this does not mean that every affected case will be resolved immediately or that a visa must automatically be approved. Each case remains subject to its own requirements, any other applicable grounds of inadmissibility, and, when relevant, an individual public charge determination.
There is also a separate operational development that should not be confused with the 75-country suspension. The Department of State has begun a global training initiative for consular officers, and immigrant visa appointments have been adjusted to allow officers to complete that training. As a result, some applicants may continue to see appointment changes or delays even though the specific 75-country suspension has ended.
Applicants with pending cases should therefore continue reviewing communications from their U.S. embassy or consulate and official Department of State updates for information specific to their cases.
An interesting coincidence with the September Visa Bulletin
There is another element that I find very interesting.
The Visa Bulletin of September 2026 acknowledges that during this fiscal year the issuance of immigrant visas decreased, in part due to policies implemented by the Administration and consulates that had limited or suspended operations.
Precisely because of this lower use of visas, the State Department moved up some dates in the Visa Bulletin to try to use the available numbers before the end of the fiscal year on September 30, 2026 .
And now one of the policies that prevented the issuance of visas to nationals of 75 countries has just been cancelled.
This could allow cases that had been blocked to reappear and, consequently, increase the demand for visa numbers again.
This is especially interesting in EB-2 , because the same September Visa Bulletin warns that the demand and use of numbers are high enough that the category could need a retrogression or even temporarily become "Unavailable" before the end of the fiscal year.
That doesn't mean it will necessarily happen. But it's another piece we should keep an eye on.
There is now another operational factor to keep in mind. The global training initiative for consular officers announced by the Department of State has resulted in temporary adjustments to immigrant visa appointments while that training takes place. Therefore, although the end of the 75-country suspension allows affected cases to move forward again, the immediate effect on immigrant visa issuance will also depend on how consular operations normalize over the coming weeks.
What should we take away from this decision?
The public charge rule did not disappear; what the court rejected was using nationality as an automatic reason to block the issuance of immigrant visas to millions of people.
The cases must be re-evaluated individually.
For many families and professionals who have been waiting for months, this remains a very important decision. But there is now a fundamental difference from the moment when I originally published this article: the Department of State has officially confirmed that the 75-country suspension is no longer in effect.
The next step is no longer to wait and see whether the Department of State will recognize the court’s decision. We now need to watch how previously affected cases move forward, what instructions applicants receive, how individual public charge determinations are handled, and how the global training of consular officers temporarily affects appointments and processing.
As I always say, immigration news can change quickly, and the details matter tremendously. I will continue reviewing the official sources and updating this publication as new information becomes available.
Sources and documents to continue investigating
US Department of State — Immigrant Visa Processing Updates for Nationalities at High Risk of US Public Benefits Reliance: Consult official publication
Center for Constitutional Rights — CLINIC v. Rubio, decision of August 21, 2026: Read summary and case documents
National Immigration Law Center — CLINIC v. Rubio: Litigation Information and Documents
Federal case file — Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. v. Rubio, No. 1:26-cv-00858: View case file information
Reuters — Coverage of the decision on August 21, 2026: Read coverage
Reuters — Trump administration issues pause on immigrant visa appointments for applicants worldwide — August 26, 2026
This article was updated through August 31, 2026. We will continue updating this publication if the Department of State, U.S. consulates, or the court issues additional relevant guidance.
This content is for educational and informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.
Comments