Colindres v. U.S. Department of State


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA KRISTEN H. COLINDRES, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 21-cv-348 (GMH) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs are a long-married couple with a young daughter who lived together in the United States for more than thirteen years. Plaintiff Kristen H. Colindres is a United States citizen. Her spouse, Plaintiff Edvin A. Colindres Juarez (“Colindres Juarez”), is a citizen of Guatemala who, after returning to his native country for a consular interview—one of the final steps in procuring a U.S. immigrant visa—was denied such a visa by the United States Embassy in Guatemala City on the basis that there is a reasonable ground to believe he seeks to enter the United States to engage in unlawful activity. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(A)(ii). 1 Plaintiffs’ primary argument is that the decision denying Colindres Juarez a visa violates their Fifth Amendment right to “[f]reedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life” because it was not based on a facially legitimate and bona fide reason (ECF No. 2, ¶¶ 40–45), although they also assert some additional constitutional and statutory claims. In response, Defendants—the Department of State, the Secre- tary of State, and the Consul General of the United States in Guatemala City (collectively, “De- fendants” or the “government”) contend that the bulk of Plaintiffs’ claims either fail under the 1 The provision under which Colindres Juarez has been deemed inadmissible is also known as Section 212(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”). doctrine of “consular non-reviewability” or, at the very least, cannot survive the constricted judi- cial review permitted when there is a plausible claim that the consular decision violated a plaintiff’s constitutional rights. The Court does not take lightly the allegations of hardship that a consular official’s decision to deny Colindres Juarez a visa has worked upon Plaintiffs and their child. However, the outcome here is largely dictated by controlling Supreme Court and D.C. Circuit precedent. Defendants’ motion to dismiss must therefore be granted. 2 I. BACKGROUND According to the complaint, 3 Colindres Juarez, a Guatemalan citizen born in 1980, was raised in Guatemala until he was fourteen years old, when he entered the United States “without inspection” and moved to New York City to live with family. ECF No. 2, ¶¶ 4, 15–17; ECF No. 1-1 at 2. A few years later, he relocated to Jacksonville, Florida. ECF No. 2, ¶ 17. In December 2006, he married Colindres, who is a United States citizen. Id., ¶¶ 19, 22. They have a daughter who was born in 2008. Id., ¶ 23. In March 2015, Colindres filed with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (“USCIS”) a Form I-130 for the benefit of her husband, which is the first step in the process of “helping an eligible relative apply to immigrate to the United States and get [a] Green Card.” Id., ¶ 24; I-130, Petition for Alien Relative (Nov. 24, 2021), https://www.uscis.gov/i-130. That petition was approved in August …

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