A unanimous Ninth Circuit ruling halted a requirement that the State Department reopen registration for up to 55,000 immigrant visas, finding that the law firm challenging the suspension had not established a sufficient legal basis to sue.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
The Trump administration secured a significant legal victory Thursday, Oct. 29, when a three-judge federal appeals court panel blocked an order requiring Secretary of State Marco Rubio to restart the Diversity Visa lottery for fiscal year 2027, allowing the government to maintain its suspension of the immigration program while litigation continues.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit unanimously granted the administration’s emergency request to stay a preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Jinsook Ohta of the Southern District of California. The ruling came hours before the State Department was required to announce registration dates for the program, which makes up to 55,000 immigrant visas available annually to applicants from countries with historically low immigration rates to the United States.
According to Bloomberg Law’s report on the decision, the appellate court’s intervention prevents the government from being compelled to reopen the lottery Nov. 1 while its appeal proceeds.
The case, Red Eagle Law, L.C. v. Rubio, arose after the State Department failed to open registration for the 2027 Diversity Visa Program. The immigration law firm Red Eagle Law filed suit in August, arguing that the administration’s suspension violated federal immigration law and the Administrative Procedure Act.
Ohta, a Biden-appointed federal judge who was born in Seoul, South Korea, and previously served as a California Superior Court judge appointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, issued a preliminary injunction requiring the department to resume the program.
Her order directed the State Department to announce registration details by Oct. 29, begin accepting applications by Nov. 1 for a 30-day period, and notify selected applicants of their eligibility to apply by Dec. 3. The process would have allowed qualified applicants to pursue visas through the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30, 2027.
The Trump administration appealed, arguing that the law firm lacked a sufficient legal interest to challenge the department’s decision.
In its Oct. 29 ruling in Red Eagle Law v. Rubio, the appellate panel agreed that the government had demonstrated a strong likelihood of prevailing because the plaintiff did not fall within the interests protected by the Diversity Visa statute.
The panel consisted of Circuit Judges M. Margaret McKeown, N. Randy Smith and Holly A. Thomas.
Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Diversity Visa Program is intended to encourage immigration from countries that have historically sent relatively few immigrants to the United States. Congress established the annual allocation of up to 55,000 visas, with applicants selected through a randomized lottery.
The State Department typically selects approximately 100,000 prospective applicants from millions of entries, although selection does not guarantee a visa. Successful entrants must satisfy eligibility requirements, undergo background screening and complete consular processing before obtaining permanent residency.
The appeals court concluded that Red Eagle Law’s financial interest in representing potential lottery winners was insufficiently connected to the program’s statutory purpose.
The judges determined that the law firm sought to protect prospective legal fees rather than an interest Congress intended to safeguard through the Diversity Visa Program.
The court explained that Congress designed the program to encourage immigration, not to generate business for immigration attorneys.
The ruling distinguished the case from other immigration lawsuits in which nonprofit organizations successfully challenged federal policies affecting their clients. In those cases, the relevant statutes expressly contemplated legal assistance or otherwise protected the interests asserted by the organizations.
The Diversity Visa statute, by contrast, contains no comparable provision establishing an independent legal interest for firms seeking to represent future applicants.
Red Eagle Law was the only plaintiff in the lawsuit and did not include prospective Diversity Visa applicants or individuals who had already been selected through the lottery.
The appellate court also emphasized that its decision should not be interpreted as approval of the administration’s suspension.
“We do not endorse the Department’s failure to open the lottery registration period,” the panel wrote.
Nevertheless, the judges concluded that Red Eagle Law had not demonstrated a likelihood of success because its interests were outside those protected by the statute.
Judge Smith issued a separate concurring opinion, arguing that the law firm also lacked standing under Article III of the Constitution.
Smith reasoned that the firm’s claimed financial injuries depended on a series of uncertain future events, including prospective immigrants entering the lottery, winning selection, qualifying for visas and choosing to hire Red Eagle Law rather than another attorney or representing themselves.
The law firm had not demonstrated that it had lost existing revenue because of the program’s suspension. Instead, it claimed the loss of potential earnings from clients it might acquire in the future.
Smith concluded that such speculative economic interests could not establish the direct injury necessary to bring the lawsuit in federal court.
The decision leaves Ohta’s preliminary injunction suspended while the Ninth Circuit considers the government’s appeal. It does not permanently abolish the Diversity Visa Program or resolve whether the State Department may lawfully decline to administer a program established by Congress.
The distinction is significant because the appeals court decided the emergency request principally on the plaintiff’s ability to pursue the lawsuit, rather than issuing a final judgment approving the administration’s underlying immigration policy.
The State Department’s failure to open registration for fiscal year 2027 remains the subject of legal controversy.
The appellate court acknowledged that federal law requires the department to administer the annual program and noted that the government had not provided an explanation for failing to open registration.
The case therefore leaves unresolved the broader question of whether the executive branch can indefinitely suspend the lottery without congressional authorization.
Attorneys representing prospective applicants could potentially pursue separate litigation if they can establish a legally protected interest directly affected by the suspension.
Curtis Morrison, an attorney associated with Red Eagle Law, indicated that the firm intended to continue challenging the administration’s decision, including through potential litigation involving individual prospective applicants.
The dispute comes as the Trump administration pursues broader restrictions on immigration programs, including changes to humanitarian parole, employment authorization and other mechanisms permitting foreign nationals to enter or remain in the United States.
The Diversity Visa lottery has long been a subject of political debate. Supporters argue that it creates immigration opportunities for qualified applicants from countries that otherwise have limited access to U.S. immigrant visas. Critics contend that immigration selection should place greater emphasis on employment qualifications, family relationships and other eligibility considerations rather than random selection.
Congress established the program through the Immigration Act of 1990, and its annual visa allocation remains part of federal immigration law.
For fiscal year 2027, however, the administration is no longer bound by the district court’s immediate registration deadlines.
No replacement registration schedule has been announced, leaving prospective applicants uncertain about whether the lottery will operate during the current fiscal year.
The Ninth Circuit has directed that a briefing schedule be established for the continuing appeal. Until further judicial action or a voluntary decision by the State Department, the administration may maintain its suspension of the 2027 Diversity Visa lottery.
Original article
Comments