UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MATTHEW THOMAS et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 19-cv-1050 (ESH) MICHAEL RICHARD POMPEO et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs Matthew Thomas and Akbar Masoumi bring this action against (1) Michael Richard Pompeo, in his official capacity as United States Secretary of State; (2) the United States Department of State; (3) Christopher A. Wray, in his official capacity as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; (4) the Federal Bureau of Investigation; (5) Steven C. Bondy, in his official capacity as Charge d’Affaires to the United Arab Emirates; and (6) the United States Embassy in Abu Dhabi (collectively, “defendants”), to compel them to complete administrative processing and adjudicate Mr. Masoumi’s visa application, which was filed over three years ago. Plaintiffs argue it has been unreasonably delayed and request relief pursuant to either the Mandamus Act, see 28 U.S.C. §1361, or the Administrative Procedure Act, see 5 U.S.C. § 701 et seq. (See Compl. at 9–10 [ECF 4].) Before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss. (See Mot. to Dismiss [ECF 15].) For the reasons stated herein, the Court will deny defendants’ motion. BACKGROUND I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND A. Presidential Proclamation 9645 On September 24, 2017, President Donald Trump issued the “Presidential Proclamation Enhancing Vetting Capabilities and Processes for Detecting Attempted Entry Into the United States by Terrorists or Other Public-Safety Threats.” See 82 Fed. Reg. 46,161 (“the Proclamation”). Pursuant to Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”): Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate 8 U.S.C. § 1882(f). In light of the Department of Homeland Security’s assessment that certain countries “have ‘inadequate’ identity-management protocols, information-sharing practices, and risk factors,” see Proclamation Sec. 1(g), the President invoked his power under INA Section 212(f) and restricted the entry of nationals from seven countries: Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen. See id. at Sec. 1(h)(ii).1 For example, subject to some exceptions, the Proclamation suspended the entry of all nationals of Iran into the United States as either immigrants or non-immigrants due to the fact that “Iran regularly fails to cooperate with the United States Government in identifying security risks, fails to satisfy at least one key risk criterion, is the source of significant terrorist threats, and fails to receive its nationals subject to final orders of removal from the United States.” See id. at Sec. 2(b)(i). 1 The Supreme Court has since upheld the Proclamation as a valid use of this authority. See Trump v. Hawaii, 138 S. Ct. 2392, 2415 (2018) (“The Proclamation is squarely within the scope of Presidential authority under the ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals