Case Status: Filed
Gomez v. Biden
We challenged the immigrant and nonimmigrant visa bans in order to protect families from indefinite separation and to prevent the suspension of the U.S. visa system.
UPDATE: On October 13, 2021, the district court in Gomez issued its final decision, ordering the State Department to process the 9,095 visas reserved for members of the Gomez class by September 30, 2022. Processing must commence “as soon as is feasible,” and the reserved visas must be “issued to eligible qualified immigrants strictly in a random order.” 8 U.S.C. § 1153(e)(2). The government must file periodic reports indicating how many reserved DV-2020 visas it has adjudicated, with the first report due on January 11, 2022 and reports due every 60 days thereafter until all reserved visas have issued.
If you are a DV-2020 Selectee but had not yet received your 2020 Diversity Visa as of April 23, 2020, you are automatically a member of the certified class. You do not need to take any additional steps to become a member of the class, and you will not receive any documentation from the court or counsel about your membership.
Class counsel will send periodic emails to share any important updates on the status of the case. If you would like to receive our email updates, please click here.
Following President Biden’s rescission of Proclamation 10014, Law Lab and its partners continue to advocate for relief for diversity visa class members. On April 9, 2021, the D.C. Circuit issued an order dismissing our appeal of Judge Mehta’s decision to deny a preliminary injunction against Proclamations 10014 and 10052. The court issued this decision because President Biden revoked Proclamation 10014, and allowed Proclamation 10052 to expire, so there is nothing left for the D.C. Circuit to decide with respect to those Proclamations.
The D.C. Circuit’s order does not affect the proceedings with respect to the DV-2020 visas that Judge Mehta ordered reserved on September 30, 2020. The parties have completed their briefing with respect to those visas. On July 19, 2021, Judge Mehta heard oral arguments on whether to grant summary judgment in our case. We asked the judge to rule in our favor and to order the government to expeditiously process the 9,095 DV-2020 visas that he reserved in September 2020. The court has taken our arguments under advisement and we expect Judge Mehta to issue a decision soon.
Innovation Law Lab and our partners challenged President Trump’s immigration bans in federal court in order to protect families from indefinite separation and to prevent the suspension of the U.S. visa system.
The complaint asked the court to block Presidential Proclamations 10014 and 10052, which effectively suspended most immigration to the United States. In signing these immigration bans, the President indefinitely separated thousands of families, threw the business plans of companies into chaos, eliminated visa categories that allow hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals to live and work in the United States, and rejected decades of Congressional judgment. Family reunification is the cornerstone of U.S. immigration policy, but under this new Proclamation, thousands of families were needlessly and cruelly separated from one another. Meanwhile, instead of protecting the U.S. labor force, the ban endangered the nation’s economy and reduces the global competitiveness of U.S. companies—to the detriment of U.S. workers.
The complaint was filed on behalf of family-based immigrant visa petitioners, diversity visa lottery winners, and nonimmigrant visa sponsors, including those who want to bring in healthcare professionals from abroad to help during the pandemic. Plaintiffs allege that the immigration ban violates their rights under the Immigration and Nationality Act and the Administrative Procedure Act and exceeds the scope of the President’s lawful powers.
The lawsuit was filed in the District Court for the District of Columbia by Innovation Law Lab, Justice Action Center (JAC), and the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), with pro bono support from Mayer Brown LLP.