PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-2146 ANTHONY M. SESAY; MABINTY SESAY, Plaintiffs – Appellants, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; JEFFREY A. ROSEN, Acting United States Attorney General; CHAD WOLF, Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security; MICHAEL R. POMPEO, Secretary of State; MARIA E. BREWER, Ambassador of the United States in Freetown, Sierra Leone; NUMBER 1 JANE DOE, Employee of U.S. Government and Adjudicating Officer at U.S. Embassy in Freetown, Sierra Leone, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District Judge. (8:18-cv-01397-DKC) Argued: December 10, 2020 Decided: January 5, 2021 Before WILKINSON and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and Gina M. GROH, Chief United States District Judge for the Northern District of West Virginia, sitting by designation. Affirmed by published opinion. Judge Wilkinson wrote the opinion, in which Judge Floyd and Chief Judge Groh joined. ARGUED: Parva Fattahi, FATTAHI IMMIGRATION LAW, LLC, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellants. Alan Carl Lazerow, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. ON BRIEF: Robert K. Hur, United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. 2 WILKINSON, Circuit Judge: Appellants Anthony Sesay, a United States citizen, and his daughter Mabinty Sesay, a citizen and resident of Sierra Leone, challenge the denial of a visa to Ms. Sesay. The district court dismissed appellants’ complaint under the doctrine of consular nonreviewability. We affirm. I. An alien must generally be issued an immigrant or nonimmigrant visa in order to enter the United States. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1181(a), 1182(a)(7). 1 A State Department consular officer makes the decision whether to grant or deny a visa, see 8 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(1), and the applicant bears the burden of proving “to the satisfaction of the consular officer that he is eligible to receive a visa,” 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Appellants began this process in October 2016 when Mr. Sesay filed an immediate- relative petition on behalf of Ms. Sesay with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services of the Department of Homeland Security. After the petition was approved, Ms. Sesay applied for a visa. In November 2017, a consular officer interviewed her at the U.S. Consulate in Sierra Leone. During this interview, the consular officer suspected Ms. Sesay of lying about her age. Appellants were informed that Ms. Sesay’s application would remain pending until she could “prove her age,” an essential fact for her visa application. 1 Consistent with the Immigration and Nationality Act, we employ the term “alien.” See 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(3) (defining the term “alien” as “any person not a citizen or national of the United States”). 3 J.A. 34; see also 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(b)(1), 1151(f)(1). Appellants supplied further documentation in December 2017. Appellants then filed a complaint in April 2018 seeking a declaratory judgment and writ of mandamus to compel adjudication of Ms. Sesay’s application. During these proceedings, the government informed appellants that Ms. Sesay’s application was denied in November ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals