Ali et al v. Trump et al
Filing
1
COMPLAINT against All Defendants (Receipt # 0981-4750904), filed by Reema Khaled Dahman, A. F. A., Juweiya Abdiaziz Ali, E. A., Ahmed Mohammed Ahmed Ali, G. E.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Executive Order, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Adams, Matt)
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 1 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Juweiya Abdiaziz ALI; A.F.A., a minor; Reema Case No.: -Khaled DAHMAN; G.E., a minor; Ahmed
Mohammed Ahmed ALI; E.A., a minor; on
behalf of themselves as individuals and on
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
behalf of others similarly situated,
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF
Plaintiffs-Petitioners,
vs.
Donald TRUMP, President of the United States
of America; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE;
Tom SHANNON, Acting Secretary of State;
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY; John F. KELLY, Secretary of
Homeland Security; U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND
IMMIGRATION SERVICES; Lori
SCIALABBA, Acting Director of USCIS;
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL
INTELLIGENCE; Michael DEMPSEY, Acting
Director of National Intelligence,
23
Defendants-Respondents.
24
25
26
27
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 0
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 2 of 20
1
INTRODUCTION
2
1.
Plaintiffs are two United States citizens, one lawful permanent resident, and three
3
nationals of three predominantly Muslim countries who seek to be reunited and live as families
4
in the United States. Like thousands before them, Plaintiffs have diligently pursued the lengthy
5
6
7
8
9
and rigorous immigrant visa process, which entails, inter alia, filing immigrant visa petitions and
immigrant visa applications, paying hundreds of dollars in filing fees, undergoing security
screenings and medical examinations, and attending an interview before a consular officer.
2.
The unlawful and discriminatory executive order issued by President Donald Trump on
10
January 27, 2017 has shattered Plaintiffs’ lives and their prospects for being reunited as well as
11
the lives and reunification prospects of the scores of similarly situated families and individuals
12
they seek to represent through this action. This far-reaching executive order contains an array of
13
problematic provisions with drastic consequences.
14
3.
15
abruptly suspended immigrant visa processing for nationals of seven predominantly Muslim
16
countries, and prohibited their entry into the United States.
17
4.
18
discrimination in the issuance of immigrant visas “because of the person’s race, sex, nationality,
19
place of birth, or place of residence.” It also violates Plaintiffs’ constitutionally protected rights
20
to family, marriage, and equal protection under the law.
21
5.
22
23
24
25
26
At issue in this suit is Section 3 of the executive order, through which President Trump
Section 3 violates Congress’ clear intent in 8 U.S.C. § 1152(a)(1) to prevent
Plaintiffs and prospective class members seek this Court’s intervention to cease
application of Section 3 of the executive order to persons in the immigrant visa process—U.S.
citizens and lawful permanent residents who have successfully petitioned for the immigration of
a family member and nationals of the seven designated countries who have applied for visas—to
prevent ongoing and future harm to these individuals. Such intervention is needed to protect the
integrity of the United States’ immigrant visa process.
27
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 1
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 3 of 20
1
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
2
6.
This case arises under the United States Constitution; the Immigration and Nationality
3
Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq.; and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 701
4
et seq.
5
6
7
8
9
7.
Jurisdiction is conferred on this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331, as a civil action
arising under the laws of the United States, and the Mandamus and Venue Act of 1962, 28
U.S.C. § 1361. Declaratory judgment is sought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-02. The United
States has waived its sovereign immunity pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 702.
10
8.
Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e) because
11
Defendants are officers or employees of the United States or agencies thereof acting in their
12
official capacities. A substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred
13
in this district, and Plaintiffs Juweiya Ali and Reema Dahman reside in this district, as do many
14
putative class members. In addition, no real property is involved in this action.
PARTIES
15
16
9.
Plaintiff Juweiya Abdiaziz Ali is a U.S. citizen who resides in Seattle, Washington.
17
10.
Plaintiff A.F.A. is her six-year-old son. He is a citizen and resident of Somalia.
18
11.
Plaintiff A.F.A. has a pending immigrant visa application based on Plaintiff Ali’s
19
approved family-based immigrant visa petition for him.
20
12.
21
United States who resides in Seattle, Washington.
22
23
24
25
Plaintiff Reema Khaled Dahman is Syrian citizen and a lawful permanent resident of the
13.
Plaintiff G.E. is her 16-year-old son. He is a citizen and resident of Syria.
14.
Plaintiff G.E. has a pending immigrant visa application based on Plaintiff Dahman’s
approved family-based immigrant visa petition for him.
15.
Plaintiff Ahmed Mohammed Ahmed Ali is a U.S. citizen who resides in Los Banos,
26
California.
27
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 2
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 4 of 20
1
16.
Plaintiff E.A. is his 12-year-old daughter. She is a citizen of Yemen currently located in
2
Djibouti.
3
17.
Plaintiff E.A. has an approved immigrant visa based on Plaintiff Ali’s approved family-
4
based immigrant visa petition for her.
5
6
7
8
9
18.
Defendant Donald Trump is the President of the United States. He is sued in his official
capacity.
19.
Defendant U.S. Department of State (DOS) is a cabinet department of the United States
federal government. DOS has an integral role in the immigrant visa application and adjudication
10
process.
11
20.
12
affairs adviser to the President. His responsibilities include administering DOS and supervising
13
the administration of U.S. immigration laws abroad. He is sued in his official capacity.
14
21.
15
United States federal government. DHS has an integral role in the immigrant visa application and
16
adjudication process.
17
22.
18
and enforcement of the INA and oversight of all operations of DHS. He is sued in his official
19
capacity.
20
23.
21
of DHS responsible for, inter alia, adjudicating immigrant visa petitions filed on behalf of
22
23
24
25
Defendant Tom Shannon is the Acting Secretary of State and as such is the chief foreign
Defendant U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is a cabinet department of the
Defendant John F. Kelly is the Secretary of DHS and is responsible for the administration
Defendant United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is a component
foreign nationals seeking to immigrate to the United States. USCIS play an integral role in the
immigrant visa application and adjudication process.
24.
Defendant Lori Scialabba is the Acting Director of USCIS and is responsible for its
oversight and administration, including responsibility for USCIS’ role in the immigrant visa
26
application and adjudication process. She is sued in her official capacity.
27
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 3
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 5 of 20
1
25.
Defendant Office of Director of National Intelligence is assigned responsibility under the
2
Executive Order to consult with DHS, to determine which countries will be encompassed by the
3
Executive Order.
4
26.
Defendant Michael Dempsey is the Acting Director of National Intelligence (DNI), and is
5
6
7
responsible for its oversight and administration, including responsibility for DNI’s role in vetting
countries targeted by the Executive Order. He is sued in his official capacity.
BACKGROUND
8
9
27.
The INA sets forth a rigorous multi-step application process for those seeking to obtain
10
an immigrant visa to the United States. See generally 8 U.S.C. §§ 1153 and 1154.
11
28.
12
U.S. citizen family member or employer must submit a visa petition on behalf of a foreign
13
national beneficiary and pay an accompanying filing fee to USCIS, a subdivision of DHS, using
14
either Form I-130 (Petition for Alien Relative), or Form I-140 (Petition for Alien Worker). To
15
be eligible to submit a family-based visa petition, the petitioner’s relationship to the beneficiary
16
must fall within a prescribed statutory classification. In order to qualify for an employment-based
17
visa, the beneficiary must meet a variety of requirements, generally including qualification for
18
the job that she seeks and a lack of U.S. workers available to take that job.
19
29.
20
legislation, including Iraq translators who have supported U.S. troops abroad or worked on
21
behalf of the U.S. government in Iraq. These individuals apply for an immigrant visa by filing
22
23
24
25
As an initial step, the government must receive and approve a visa petition. A qualifying
Certain other limited categories of noncitizens are eligible to immigrate pursuant to
Form I-360 (Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant) with USCIS.
30.
If USCIS approves the visa petition, the beneficiary of the petition is eligible to begin the
process to apply to immigrate as soon as a visa number becomes available. If a visa number is
immediately available, she may begin the process of applying for the immigrant visa
26
immediately; if there is a backlog in the visa category in which she falls, she may wait months or
27
years for a visa number to become immediately available. The length of the wait depends on
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 4
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 6 of 20
1
factors such as the type of petition, the country of nationality, and/or the family or employment
2
category for which a visa number is sought.
3
31.
After USCIS approves an immigrant visa petition, the immigrant visa beneficiary (i.e.,
4
the immigrant visa applicant) faces additional fees, additional applications, and screening by the
5
6
7
8
9
National Visa Center (NVC), a component of DOS. Once the additional fees are paid, the
immigration visa applicant must submit Form DS-260 (Immigrant Visa Electronic Application),
and, in many cases, Form I-864 (Affidavit of Support). DOS and DHS then conduct a variety of
security checks regarding the applicants’ background and any possible criminal history.
10
32.
11
approved physician.
12
33.
13
U.S. Embassy or consulate will issue an interview notice, requiring her to appear at a U.S.
14
Embassy or consulate. At the appointment, a consular officer interviews the immigrant visa
15
applicant and reviews the wide range of supporting documents, including documentation of her
16
medical exam, identity documents and documents establishing her visa eligibility, a police
17
certificate, and any military or prison records.
18
34.
19
establish that the applicant is eligible for a visa and is not barred by various grounds of
20
inadmissibility set forth in the INA, including national security-related grounds. See, e.g., 8
21
U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3). Among the tools available to consular officers in making these
22
determinations are Security Advisory Opinions (SAOs), a process through which a noncitizen’s
23
24
25
Immigrant visa applicants also must undergo a medical examination by an Embassy-
After all necessary paperwork and agency screening of the beneficiary is completed, the
In order for a consular officer to grant an immigrant visa application, the officer must
information is referred to a variety of U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies for
assessment. Both consular officers and DHS employees stationed at U.S. Embassies and
Consulates pursuant to Section 428 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 may request that an
26
SAO be submitted. A consular visa is not issued until the SAO process is completed.
27
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 5
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 7 of 20
1
35.
If the consular officer approves the immigrant visa application, the person is presented
2
with an immigrant visa packet which they must carry and present upon arrival in the United
3
States. At the time the individual receives the packet, she becomes an immigrant visa holder and
4
must enter the United States within 6 months of the date her visa is issued.
5
6
7
8
9
36.
The individual presents the visa packet to a Customs and Border Protection inspecting
officer at a port of entry. Upon admission to the United States, the immigrant visa holder
becomes a lawful permanent resident (LPR).
37.
Other noncitizens may qualify for an immigrant visa through such programs as the
10
diversity visa program, and special immigrant visa programs. These individuals follow a similar
11
application, screening, adjudication and admission process.
12
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
13
President Trump’s January 27, 2017 Executive Order
14
38.
15
United States.
16
39.
17
“Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States,” (EO). The order is
18
attached as Exhibit A.
19
40.
20
policy for the September 11, 2001 tragedies (Sections 1 and 2), the EO orders the immediate
21
implementation of major changes to the ability of foreign nationals to seek and obtain admission
22
23
24
25
On January 20, 2017, Donald Trump was inaugurated as the forty-fifth President of the
One week later, on January 27, President Trump signed an executive order entitled,
Claiming a need to “protect Americans” from the threat of terrorism and blaming DOS
to the United States. The EO impacts all major categories of foreign nationals who seek
admission to the United States: immigrants, nonimmigrants, and refugees. Among other things,
the EO directs federal agencies to develop screening standards for all immigration benefits to
identify individuals who enter fraudulently intending to cause harm (Section 4); suspends
26
refugee processing for 120 days, halts the processing and admission of Syrian refugees
27
indefinitely, and reduces the number of refugee admissions from 110,000 to 50,000 in fiscal year
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 6
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 8 of 20
1
2017 (Section 5); orders the heads of executive departments to consider rescinding their exercise
2
of discretionary authority to waive inadmissibility under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3) (Section 6);
3
directs agencies to expedite the completion and implementation of a biometric entry-exit system
4
which includes reporting requirements (Section 7); and suspends the State Department’s
5
6
7
8
9
authority to waive visa interviews unless a person is subject to a specific statutory exemption
(Section 8).
41.
Section 3, entitled “Suspension of Issuance of Visas and Other Immigration Benefits to
Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern” is at issue in this lawsuit. Sections 3(a) and (b)
10
order DHS, in consultation with DOS and the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), to review
11
and submit a report to the President on “the information needed from any country to adjudicate
12
any visa, admission, or other benefit under the INA (adjudications)” to verify an applicant’s
13
identity and assess his or her threat to security or public-safety.
14
42.
15
countries referred to in 8 U.S.C. § 1187(a)(12) from entering the United States on an immigrant
16
or nonimmigrant visa for 90 days, with limited exceptions not relevant here. These countries are
17
Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.
18
43.
19
information on foreign nationals included in the DHS report to the President and requesting their
20
compliance. For those that fail to comply, the President may impose a ban on the entry of
21
nationals of that country until such time as the country complies. At any time, DOS or DHS may
22
25
Sections 3(d)-(f) set forth a timetable for identifying countries that do not supply the
suggest that the President impose similar treatment on additional countries.
23
24
In Section 3(c), the President, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), bans all persons from
Resulting Chaos
44.
Immediately following issuance of the EO, hundreds of persons involved in the
immigrant visa process were harmed. Plaintiffs Juweiya Ali, A.F.A., Dahman, and G.E., along
26
with many others, had already begun the visa application process; they faced the immediate
27
suspension of immigrant visa processing. Plaintiff E.A. and many others had been issued a visa
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 7
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 9 of 20
1
and were en route or making plans to travel to the United States; they were now banned from
2
entering the United States notwithstanding their valid visas.
3
45.
The DOS and some U.S. embassies and consulates abroad posted the following notice
4
online, advising immigrant visa applicants that visa issuance had been suspended and visa
5
6
interviews cancelled.
Urgent Notice: Executive Order on Protecting the Nation from Terrorist Attacks
by Foreign Nationals
7
8
JANUARY 27, 2017
9
Urgent Notice
10
Per the Executive Order on Protecting the Nation from Terrorist Attacks by
Foreign Nationals signed on January 27, 2017, visa issuance to nationals of the
countries of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen has been
suspended effective immediately until further notification. If you are a citizen of
one of these countries, please do not schedule a visa appointment or pay any visa
fees at this time. If you already have an appointment scheduled, please DO NOT
ATTEND. You will not be permitted entry to the Embassy/Consulate. We will
announce any other changes affecting travelers to the United States as soon as that
information is available.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
See https://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/news.html; see also https://sudan.usembassy.gov/,
18
https://iraq.usembassy.gov/pr_012817.html.
19
46.
20
applicants. For example, upon information and belief, the U.S. Embassy Baghdad sent
21
the following notice to an immigrant visa applicant again advising both that visa
22
processing has been suspended and that all previously-issued visas have been revoked; it
23
reads:
24
25
26
27
28
In addition, some U.S. embassies and consulates have sent similar notifications to
Dear applicant,
Urgent Notice: Per U.S. Presidential Executive Order signed on January 27,
2017, visa issuance to aliens from the countries of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia,
Sudan, Syria and Yemen has been suspended effective immediately until further
notification. If you are a national, or dual national, of one of these countries,
please do not schedule a visa appointment or pay any visa fees at this time. If you
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 8
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 10 of 20
1
already have an appointment scheduled, please DO NOT ATTEND your
appointment as we will not be able to proceed with your visa interview. Please
note that certain travel for official governmental purposes, related to official
business at or on behalf of designated international organizations, on behalf of
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or by certain officials is not subject to
this suspension. Please continue to monitor the Embassy Baghdad
website https://iraq.usembassy.gov/ and www.travel.state.gov for further update.
2
3
4
5
Please be advised that all previously-issued visas to the United States for Iraqi
nationals currently outside the United States have been revoked. You are
therefore advised not to purchase tickets or to attempt to travel to the United
States until further notice.
6
7
8
Regards,
U.S. Embassy Baghdad
9
10
47.
An untold number of individuals who had already received visas have been left unable to
11
travel. Many, like Plaintiffs Ahmed Ali and his daughter E.A., had booked travel to the United
12
States and were stopped in transit, and others had already arrived and were refused entry into the
13
country and forced to return.
14
Animus Directing President Trump’s January 27, 2017 Executive Order
15
16
17
18
48.
Through repeated statements, President Trump has made clear his intent to target the
admission of foreign nationals based upon their Muslim religion. For example, as a candidate,
President Trump championed an explicit Muslim ban, “calling for a total and complete shutdown
19
of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is
20
going on.” Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump Statement On Preventing Muslim Immigration
21
(Dec. 7, 2015), https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-statement-on-
22
preventing-muslim-immigration.
23
49.
24
executive order was intended to be a “legal” ban on Muslims. See Amy B. Wang, Trump asked
25
for a ‘Muslim ban,’ Giuliani says — and ordered a commission to do it ‘legally’, Wash. Post
26
(Jan. 29, 2017) (“So when [Trump] first announced it, he said, 'Muslim ban.' He called me up.
27
He said, 'Put a commission together. Show me the right way to do it legally.'").
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 9
Rudolph Giuliani, President Trumps’ advisor on cybersecurity, confirmed that the current
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 11 of 20
1
50.
The EO exempts only Christian refugees from the ban imposed on the seven Muslim-
2
majority countries. See Ex. A, E.O., at Section 5(b); Michael D. Shear & Helene Cooper, Trump
3
Bars Refugees and Citizens of 7 Muslim Countries, N.Y. Times (Jan. 27, 2017) (“[President
4
Trump] ordered that Christians and others from minority religions be granted priority over
5
6
Muslims.”).
PLAINTIFFS’ ALLEGATIONS
7
Plaintiffs Juweiya Abdiaziz Ali and her son A.F.A.
8
51.
Plaintiff Juweiya Abdiaziz Ali is a 23-year-old U.S. citizen who resides in Seattle,
9
Washington.
10
52.
Ms. Ali was born in Somalia and came to the United States as a child.
53.
She derived U.S. citizenship on August 31, 2010 when her mother became a U.S.
11
12
13
14
15
citizen.
54.
On August 12, 2016, Ms. Ali filed a family-based immigrant visa petition (Form I-130)
for her son, Plaintiff A.F.A., with USCIS, along with the then requisite $420.00 filing fee.
16
55.
A.F.A. is a 6-year-old citizen and resident of Somalia, where he lives with his
17
grandmother.
18
56.
19
behalf of A.F.A. and his case was subsequently transferred to the National Visa Center (“NVC”)
20
for the processing of an immigrant visa as a child of a U.S. citizen (IR-2).
21
57.
22
Immigrant Visa Application Processing Fee, along with the requisite $120 for the Affidavit of
23
Support Fee.
24
58.
25
application (Form DS-260). Also on that date, she mailed all supporting documents and Request
26
for Exemption for Intending Immigrant’s Affidavit of Support (Form I-864W) to the NVC.
On December 21, 2016, USCIS approved the immigrant visa petition Ms. Ali filed on
On January 17, 2017, the NVC processed Ms. Ali’s payment of the requisite $325 for the
On January 20, 2017, Ms. Ali electronically submitted A.F.A.’s immigrant visa
27
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 10
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 12 of 20
1
59.
The United States does not have an embassy or mission that processes immigrant visas in
2
Somalia. The U.S. Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya can process and issue immigrant visas for
3
Somalian nationals.
4
60.
Ms. Ali and A.F.A. are currently waiting for the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi to schedule an
5
6
7
8
9
10
immigrant visa interview.
61.
Pursuant to Section 3(c) of the EO, Defendants have suspended the processing of
A.F.A.’s immigrant visa interview for 90 days from the date of the order—i.e., April 27, 2017.
62.
Pursuant to Sections 3(e) and 3(f) of the EO, there is a real possibility that the United
States will not permit A.F.A. to enter the United States to join his mother, Ms. Ali.
11
Plaintiffs Reema Khaled Dahman and her son G.E.
Plaintiff Reema Khaled Dahman is a 41-year-old U.S. lawful permanent resident (“LPR”)
12
63.
13
who lives in Seattle, Washington.
14
64.
She is a Syrian citizen who became an LPR on September 18, 2012.
15
65.
On October 19, 2015, Ms. Dahman filed a family-based immigrant visa petition (Form I-
16
130) on behalf of her son, Plaintiff G.E., with USCIS, along with the then requisite $420.00
17
filing fee.
18
19
20
21
66.
G.E. is a 16-year-old citizen and resident of Syria, where he lives with his grandmother.
67.
G.E. and his mother have not seen each other since 2012.
68.
On June 1, 2016, USCIS approved the I-130 petition Ms. Dahman filed on behalf of G.E.
69.
USCIS subsequently transferred his case to the NVC for the processing of an immigrant
22
visa as a minor son of an LPR (F2).
23
70.
On September 22, 2016, the NVC processed Ms. Dahaman’s payment of the requisite
24
$325 for the Immigrant Visa Application Processing Fee, along with the requisite $120 for the
25
26
Affidavit of Support Fee.
27
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 11
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 13 of 20
1
71.
On December 2, 2016, Ms. Dahman electronically submitted G.E.’s immigrant visa
2
application (Form DS-260). Also on that date, Ms. Dahman e-mailed the NVC all civil
3
documents and her Affidavit of Support (Form I-864).
4
72.
The United States does not have an embassy or mission that processes immigrant visas in
5
6
7
8
9
Syria. The U.S. Embassy in Amman, Jordan processes and issues immigrant visas for Syrian
nationals.
73.
Ms. Dahman and G.E. are currently waiting for the U.S. Embassy in Amman to schedule
an immigrant visa interview.
10
74.
11
visas of Syrian nationals pursuant to Section 3(c) of the EOR, see
12
https://jo.usembassy.gov/special-information-for-syrian-applicants/ (last visited Jan. 30, 2017).
13
75.
14
immigrant visa interview for 90 days from the date of the order—i.e., April 27, 2017.
15
76.
16
States will not permit G.E. to enter the United States to join his mother, Ms. Dahman.
17
18
19
20
21
The website of the U.S. Embassy in Amman has suspended the processing of immigrant
Pursuant to Section 3(c) of the EO, Defendants have suspended the processing of G.E.’s
Pursuant to Sections 3(e) and 3(f) of the EO, there is a real possibility that the United
Plaintiff Ahmed Mohammed Ahmed Ali and his daughter E.A.
77.
Plaintiff Ahmed Mohammed Ahmed Ali is a 38-year-old U.S. citizen (“USC”) who
resides in Los Banos, California.
78.
Mr. Ali was born in Yemen and became a naturalized U.S. citizen on July 19, 2010.
79.
On April 11, 2011, Mr. Ali filed a family-based immigrant visa petition (Form I-130) for
22
his daughter, Plaintiff E.A., with USCIS, along with the then requisite $420 filing fee.
23
80.
Plaintiff E.A. is a 12-year-old citizen and resident of Yemen, where she had been living
24
with her grandparents.
25
26
81.
On June 10, 2013, USCIS approved the immediate relative I-130 petition for E.A.
27
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 12
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 14 of 20
1
82.
On July 15, 2013, the NVC processed Mr. Ali’s payment of the then requisite $230 for
2
the Immigrant Visa Application Processing Fee, along with the then requisite $88 for the
3
Affidavit of Support Fee.
4
83.
On August 11, 2014, Mr. Ali electronically submitted E.A.’s Immigrant Visa Electronic
5
6
7
8
9
Application (Form DS-260). The next day, he e-mailed all civil documents and his Affidavit of
Support (Form I-864) to the NVC.
84.
The NVC then forwarded the case to the U.S. Embassy in Djibouti, Djibouti for further
processing and to schedule an interview.
10
85.
11
Djibouti for her interview. E.A. traveled for about 20 hours from Yemen to Djibouti. E.A. and
12
Mr. Ali were notified that the immigrant visa was approved.
13
86.
14
pick up the physical passport with the immigrant visa on January 26, 2017.
15
87.
Mr. Ali and E.A.’s airline ticket cost a total of $2,032.96.
16
88.
On January 26, 2017, E.A. paid an additional $220 immigrant visa processing fee that
17
USCIS required after she received her visa. See https://www.uscis.gov/file-online/uscis-
18
immigrant-fee (last visited Jan. 30, 2017)
19
89.
20
United States on Ethiopian Airlines. While at the airport, Mr. Ali was told by airline officials that
21
his daughter was not permitted to board the flight, pursuant to Section 3(c) of the EO.
22
23
24
25
On January 22, 2017, she appeared with her father, Mr. Ali, at the U.S. Embassy in
E.A.’s immigrant visa was issued on January 25, 2017, and Mr. Ali and E.A. were able to
On January 28, 2017, Mr. Ali and E.A. sought to board a flight from Djibouti to the
90.
Mr. Ali and E.A. are currently in Djibouti.
91.
Pursuant to Sections 3(e) and 3(f) of the EO, there is a real possibility that the United
States will not permit E.A. to enter the United States, along with her U.S. citizen father, to join
her U.S. citizen mother and her two U.S. citizen sisters.
26
92.
The website of the U.S. Embassy in Djibouti has suspended the processing of immigrant
27
visas of Yemeni nationals pursuant to Section 3(c) of the EO, see
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 13
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 15 of 20
1
https://dj.usembassy.gov/urgent-notice-per-u-s-presidential-executive-order-signed-january-27-
2
2017/ (last visited Jan. 30, 2017).
3
4
CLASS ALLEGATIONS
5
93.
6
situated pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(2). A class action is proper
7
because this action involves questions of law and fact common to the class, the class is so
8
numerous that joinder of all members is impractical, Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of
9
10
11
Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of themselves and all others who are similarly
the class, Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class, and Defendants
have acted on grounds that apply generally to the class, so that final injunctive relief or
corresponding declaratory relief is appropriate with respect to the class as a whole.
12
94.
In addition to Plaintiffs A.F.A., G.E., and E.A., there are numerous other immigrant visa
13
applicants or immigrant visa holders from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen.
14
Each of these similarly situated individuals has had their immigrant visa application suspended
15
16
17
18
19
or invalidated due to the EO.
95.
In addition to Plaintiffs Juweiya Ali, Reema Dahman, and Ahmed Ali, there are
numerous others who have petitioned for family members from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya,
Somalia, and Yemen. Each of these similarly situated individuals is seeking to be reunited with
20
the immigrant visa applicants who has had their immigrant visa application suspended or
21
invalidated due to the EO.
22
96.
23
and injunctive relief to prohibit Defendants’ policy, pattern, and practice of suspending
24
immigrant visa processing and temporarily invalidating the immigrant visas.
25
97.
26
Section 3(c) of the Executive Order signed by President Trump on January 27, 2017 (currently
27
Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen), who have applied for or will apply for an
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 14
Each of these similarly situated individuals is entitled to bring a complaint for declaratory
Plaintiffs seek to represent a class consisting of all nationals of countries designated by
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 16 of 20
1
immigrant visa and the visa petitioners for those nationals, whose visa applications have been or
2
will be suspended or denied, or whose immigrant visas have been or will be revoked, or who
3
have been or will be denied the ability to travel to the United States, on the basis of the January
4
27, 2017 Executive Order.
5
6
7
8
9
98.
Plaintiffs seek to represent the class and are adequate class representatives. All Plaintiffs
have been subject to harm caused by Section 3 of the EO in that the EO either has suspended the
immigrant visa application process or revoked or invalidated the immigrant visa previously
received.
10
99.
11
number of individuals who are subject to/affected by Section 3 of the EO is not known with
12
precision by Plaintiffs, but is easily ascertainable by Defendants, as will be addressed in
13
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification.
14
100.
15
include, but are not limited to: whether the EO violates the INA, the APA, and the U.S.
16
Constitution.
17
101.
18
whole. Defendants have subjected and will subject class members to Section 3 of the EO absent
19
relief by this Court.
20
102.
21
The members of the Proposed Class are ascertainable and identifiable through notice and
22
23
24
25
The Proposed Class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable. The
Common questions of law and fact bind the members of the Proposed Class. These
The claims of the named Plaintiffs are typical of the claims of the Proposed Class as a
Plaintiffs know of no conflict between their interests and those of the Proposed Class.
discovery. In defending their own rights, the individual Plaintiffs will defend the rights of all
class members fairly and adequately.
103.
Plaintiffs are represented in this case by counsel with deep knowledge of immigration
law and extensive experience litigating class actions and complex cases. Plaintiffs’ attorneys
26
have the requisite level of expertise to adequately prosecute this case on their behalf and on
27
behalf of the Proposed Class.
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 15
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 17 of 20
1
104.
Defendants have act on grounds generally applicable to each member of the Proposed
2
Class by subjecting Plaintiffs and class members to Section 3 of the EO.
3
105.
A class action is superior to other methods available for the fair and efficient adjudication
4
of this controversy because joinder of all members of the class is impracticable.
5
6
7
8
9
CAUSES OF ACTION
COUNT ONE
Violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act and the Administrative Procedure Act
106.
Plaintiffs repeat and incorporate by reference each and every allegation contained in the
10
preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
11
107.
Section 202(a)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1152(a)(1), expressly
12
provides for the non-discriminatory issuance of immigrant visas; it mandates that, with limited
13
14
15
16
17
exceptions not relevant here, “no person shall receive any preference or priority or be
discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person’s race, sex,
nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.”
108.
Section 1152(a)(1) was intended to protect the interests of both U.S. citizen and lawful
18
permanent resident immigrant visa petitioners as well as immigrant visa applicants or holders.
19
109.
20
“nationality, place of birth, or place or residence,” and therefore is discriminatory and violates
21
8 U.S.C. § 1152(a)(1).
22
110.
23
invalidating or revoking already issued immigrant visas is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of
24
discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; contrary to constitutional right, power,
25
privilege, or immunity; in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of
26
statutory right; and without observance of procedure required by law, in violation of the
27
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 706(2)(A)-(D).
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 16
The EO discriminates against immigrant visa applicants or holders on the basis of their
Defendants’ actions in suspending the processing of Plaintiffs’ immigrant visas, and/or
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 18 of 20
1
COUNT TWO
Mandamus, 28 U.S.C. § 1361
2
3
111.
4
preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
5
112.
6
visas “because of the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.”
7
8
9
113.
Plaintiffs repeat and incorporate by reference each and every allegation contained in the
8 U.S.C. § 1152(a)(1) prohibits the government from denying issuance of immigrant
Pursuant to the EO, Defendants have suspended issuance of and/or invalidated or revoked
Plaintiffs’ immigrant visas on the basis of their “nationality, place of birth, or place or
residence.”
10
114.
11
Defendants unlawful adherence to the EO—and continuing refusal to process and issue
immigrant visas or treat as valid existing immigrant visas—violates the government’s clear,
12
nondiscretionary obligation to adjudicate immigrant visa applications and issue immigrant visas
13
14
in a non-discriminatory manner.
COUNT THREE
Violation of Fifth Amendment –Equal Protection
15
16
17
115.
18
preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
19
116.
20
individuals due process of the laws, which includes a guarantee of equal protection.
21
117.
22
place of birth without sufficient justification, and therefore violates the equal protection
23
component of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
24
118.
25
effect on—Muslims, which also violates the equal protection component of the Due Process
26
Plaintiffs repeat and incorporates by reference each and every allegation contained in the
The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees all
Section 3 of the EO discriminates against Plaintiffs on the basis of their nationality and/or
Additionally, the EO was substantially motivated by animus toward—and has a disparate
Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
27
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 17
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 19 of 20
1
COUNT FOUR
Violation of the Fifth Amendment – Due Process
(Plaintiffs Juweiya Ali, Reema Dahman, and Ahmed Ali Against All Defendants)
2
3
4
119.
Plaintiffs repeat and incorporate by reference each and every allegation contained in the
5
preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein
6
120.
7
provides that “[n]o person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process
8
of law.”
9
121.
The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Plaintiffs Juweiya Ali, Reema Dahman, and Ahmed Ali have a constitutionally protected
10
liberty interest in their family life.
11
122.
12
including actions that do not adhere to the constraints that Congress has imposed or the facts may
13
dictate.
14
123.
15
the validity of existing immigrant visas, taken pursuant to the EO, violate the procedural due
16
At a minimum, due process protects individuals against arbitrary government action,
Defendants’ actions in suspending the processing of their immigrant visas and in denying
process rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.
17
18
19
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs and other members of the proposed class respectfully pray that
this Court grant the following relief:
20
a. Assume jurisdiction over this matter;
21
b. Certify the case as class action as proposed herein;
22
c. Appoint Plaintiffs as representatives of the classes;
23
24
25
26
27
28
d. Declare Section 3(c) of the Executive Order is contrary to the statute and the
Constitution;
e. Issue an order enjoining Defendants from applying Section 3(c) of the Executive Order
to Plaintiffs and proposed class members;
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 18
Case 2:17-cv-00135-JLR Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 20 of 20
1
f. Award Plaintiffs’ counsel reasonable attorneys’ fees under the Equal Access to Justice
2
Act, and any other applicable statute or regulation; and
3
g. Grant such further relief as the Court deems just, equitable, and appropriate.
4
5
Respectfully submitted this 30th of January, 2017, by:
6
7
8
s/Matt Adams
Matt Adams, WSBA No. 28287
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
s/Glenda Aldana
Glenda M. Aldana Madrid, WSBA 46987
Maria Lucia Chavez, WSBA No. 43826,
application for admission forthcoming
NORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECT
615 2nd Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, WA
98104 (206) 957-8611
(206) 587-4025 (fax)
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Trina Realmuto, pro hac vice admission
forthcoming
Kristin Macleod-Ball, pro hac vice admission
forthcoming
NATIONAL IMMIGRATION PROJECT
OF THE NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD
14 Beacon Street, Suite 602
Boston, MA 02108
(617) 227-9727
(617) 227-5495 (fax)
25
26
27
28
COMPLAINT—CLASS ACTION FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF - 19
Mary Kenney, pro hac vice admission
forthcoming
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, pro hac vice
admission forthcoming
Melissa Crow, pro hac vice admission
forthcoming
AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL
1331 G Street, NW, Suite 200
Washington, D.C. 20005
(202) 507-7512
(202) 742-5619 (fax)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?