Copied from a support group on WhatsApp
The fate of the 39 "travel ban" and "partial ban" countries remains locked in a high-stakes legal battle, but the government's Motion to Dismiss creates distinct scenarios depending on how Judge Amy Berman Jackson rules. [1] (https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72232725/chikumba-v-us-department-of-state/), [2] (https://eiglaw.com/lawsuit-challenges-dos-visa-freeze-for-39-travel-ban-countries/), [3] (https://www.reddit.com/r/NationalVisaCenter/comments/1t1fyik/lawsuits\_for\_banned\_countries/)Because the government filed its motion on the September 4 deadline, no immediate change occurs to visa processing for these 39 nations. The processing freeze initiated under Presidential Proclamation 10998 remains fully active while the litigation plays out. [1] (https://eiglaw.com/lawsuit-challenges-dos-visa-freeze-for-39-travel-ban-countries/)The legal mechanisms and the upcoming pathways will dictate what happens next to the affected countries:The Legal Core of the CaseThe lawsuit (Chikumba v. Department of State) does not seek to overturn the President's constitutional authority to restrict physical entry into the United States. Instead, it challenges the Department of State's (DOS) authority to issue a blanket freeze on visa processing and adjudication. The plaintiffs argue that federal law requires the DOS to process applications individually, even if a presidential ban might ultimately block entry at the border. [1] (https://eiglaw.com/lawsuit-challenges-dos-visa-freeze-for-39-travel-ban-countries/)Future Scenarios After the Motion to DismissIf the Judge Dismisses the Case ❌If the Judge Denies the Dismissal (Plaintiffs Win Motion) ⚖️Visa Freeze Remains Active: The Department of State will continue its categorical freeze on issuing immigrant and non-immigrant visas for the 39 restricted nations.Case Moves Forward: The lawsuit progresses to the merits stage, allowing plaintiffs to seek a preliminary or permanent injunction to halt the freeze.No Individual Review: Consular offices will not schedule or process interviews for normal applicants from these regions.Potential Resumption of Interviews: If the court later rules the freeze illegal—similar to what a federal court recently did to a separate 75-country green card pause—embassies would be ordered to resume case-by-case processing.Limited Path Forward: Plaintiffs would need to appeal the dismissal to a higher circuit court.The Entry Catch-22: Even if the freeze is struck down and visas are issued, applicants from full-ban countries may still face blockades by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at U.S. airports unless they possess a National Interest Exception (NIE).What to Watch For NextThe immediate next step is for the plaintiffs' legal team to file an opposition brief to counter the government's arguments. A final decision by Judge Jackson on whether to throw the case out or let it advance is expected to take several weeks to a few months.