Skip to content
Court cases

Visa and green card lawsuits 2026: status, who is covered

Updated: Author: Alina Kanametova

Key answer

Status as of Sep 30, 2026. The immigrant-visa pause for 75 countries is vacated for everyone (CLINIC v. Rubio, Aug 24, 2026); the government is appealing. For DV-2026 selectees all three pauses are temporarily vacated (Medani v. Trump, Aug 28, 2026), but by law a DV can be issued only until September 30, and the court has not ordered numbers held past that date. The DHS public charge rule has been in force since Sep 18, 2026 - the states' suit has no ruling. The fixed admission period rule for F-1 and J-1 was postponed by a court on Sep 14, 2026. The USCIS memo on AOS is challenged but not blocked. The agency documents behind the $100,000 H-1B payment are vacated by a court (California v. Mullin), the appeal is pending, and the President extended the proclamation itself on Sep 18, 2026 to Sep 21, 2027.

8cases in the table, status as of Sep 30, 2026
3rulings for everyone: a rule vacated or postponed
2rulings for a court-defined class
3suits with no ruling yet

All cases in one table

CaseTopicWho is coveredStatus
Medani v. TrumpDV lotterya class defined by the courtThe temporary vacatur order stands; the plaintiffs' motion of Sep 24 awaits a ruling.
CLINIC v. RubioImmigrant visaseveryone - the rule is set aside or postponed as a wholeThe policy is vacated; the appeal and the stay motion in the Court of Appeals are pending.
Red Eagle Law v. EdlowUSCIS holdsa class defined by the courtThe injunction stands; the case is stayed pending the Dorcas appeal.
State of New York v. DHSPublic chargeno ruling yetFiled, no ruling, the rule is in force.
Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration v. DHSF-1 and J-1 studentseveryone - the rule is set aside or postponed as a wholeThe rule is postponed; next status conference Oct 2, 2026, no appeal on the docket.
Red Eagle Law v. RubioDV lotteryno ruling yetNo ruling; an oral ruling is set for Oct 14, 2026.
State of California v. MullinWork visaseveryone - the rule is set aside or postponed as a wholeThe vacatur stands; the appeal is undecided; the proclamation is extended to Sep 21, 2027.
Soltanmohammadi v. EdlowGreen card inside the USno ruling yetFiled, no ruling; no court has blocked the memo.

What it means for your visa

  • DV-2026 selectees

    The pauses are temporarily vacated for DV-2026 (Medani v. Trump), interviews and re-interviews are running; a visa can be issued only until Sep 30, 2026.

    DV-2026 after September 30

  • The DV-2027 lottery

    Entry is not announced; Red Eagle Law v. Rubio awaits a ruling on Oct 14, 2026.

    The DV green card lottery

  • Family and employment immigrant visas from the 75 countries

    The pause is vacated for everyone (CLINIC v. Rubio), refusals under it are being reconsidered; the appeal is pending.

    The 75-country visa pause

  • USCIS applications by nationals of the 39 countries

    The PM-602-0192 and PM-602-0194 holds are enjoined for the class (Red Eagle Law v. Edlow).

    USCIS case delays

  • Green card inside the US (I-485)

    The public charge rule of Sep 18, 2026 is in force, the states' suit has no ruling; the AOS memo is challenged but not blocked.

    The USCIS memo on AOS

  • H-1B employers and workers

    The documents imposing the $100,000 payment are vacated, the appeal is undecided; the proclamation runs to Sep 21, 2027 and the USCIS page still describes the payment.

    The H-1B visa

  • F-1 and J-1 students

    The fixed admission period rule is postponed by the court for everyone; the old D/S regime continues.

    The F-1 student visa

DV lottery

Medani v. Trump

US District Court, Northern District of California, case 5:26-cv-06332-EJD

  1. - Order (ECF 83): three policies - the State Department DV issuance pause, the USCIS DV hold (PM-602-0193) and the 75-country pause - temporarily vacated for DV-2026; State and USCIS must "to the extent practicable and in good faith" reconsider refusals and resume processing during the rest of the fiscal year.
  2. - Order (ECF 93): the court found the State Department had failed to schedule a single interview and ordered status reports every Monday, Wednesday and Friday until the fiscal year ends. Footnote 3: the court makes no finding yet on its authority to preserve the ability to receive a DV past September 30 (citing Goodluck v. Biden, 2024).
  3. - Plaintiffs filed an emergency motion for supplemental relief (ECF 121); heard on Sep 29, no ruling on the docket as of Sep 30.

Who is covered: All DV-2026 selectees and derivatives subject to the three policies (subclasses certified by the court).

What it means: DV-2026: interviews and re-interviews resumed; by law a visa can only be issued until Sep 30, 2026. The court has not ordered visa numbers held past that date.

Status as of Sep 30, 2026: The temporary vacatur order stands; the plaintiffs' motion of Sep 24 awaits a ruling.

Agency document: USCIS: court order on the Diversity Visa hold policy (Medani v. Trump), Sep 4, 2026; USCIS: memo PM-602-0193 on the DV hold, Dec 19, 2025 (PDF with the court notice); State Department: Diversity Visa issuance updated guidance (Aug 31, 2026: the December 2025 pause is no longer in effect)

Immigrant visas

CLINIC v. Rubio

US District Court, Southern District of New York, case 1:26-cv-00858-JAV

  1. - Opinion: the pause on immigrant visas for nationals of 75 countries (since Jan 21, 2026) held unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act.
  2. - Judgment (ECF 84): the policy is set aside and vacated, as are refusals based solely on it.
  3. - The government appealed to the Second Circuit (case 26-2573); the same day the State Department cable 26 STATE 88862 said no applicant may be refused under 221(g) for the pause.
  4. - The court denied a stay pending appeal (ECF 109); on Sep 28 the government asked the Court of Appeals for a stay - still pending.

Who is covered: All immigrant-visa applicants from the 75 countries: the policy itself is vacated, not just for the plaintiffs. Per an archived State Department page (February 2026) the list included Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Moldova; Ukraine was not on it.

What it means: Family and employment immigrant visas: interviews and issuance resumed, cases refused under the pause are being reconsidered; on reconsideration the State Department re-runs the public-charge check. If the appeals court stays the judgment, the pause could return.

Status as of Sep 30, 2026: The policy is vacated; the appeal and the stay motion in the Court of Appeals are pending.

USCIS holds

Red Eagle Law v. Edlow

US District Court, Northern District of California, case 3:26-cv-04850-CRB

  1. - Earlier, in Dorcas v. USCIS (Rhode Island, 26-cv-00132), the court vacated the PM-602-0192 and PM-602-0194 holds for everyone; on Aug 14 the First Circuit stayed that ruling only as to the "comprehensive re-review" policy.
  2. - Order (ECF 57): class certified and a preliminary injunction granted - USCIS processes the class's applications in the normal course.
  3. - USCIS posted a notice of the order; the case was stayed pending the Dorcas appeal (ECF 59).

Who is covered: Nationals of the 39 countries in Proclamations 10949 and 10998 (and the Palestinian Authority) whose USCIS applications, including I-589, are held under PM-602-0192 or PM-602-0194.

What it means: This class's USCIS applications (asylum, green card, others) must be processed without the nationality-based hold.

Status as of Sep 30, 2026: The injunction stands; the case is stayed pending the Dorcas appeal.

Agency document: USCIS: court order on the PM-602-0192 and PM-602-0194 holds (Red Eagle Law v. Edlow), Aug 28, 2026

Public charge

State of New York v. DHS

US District Court, Southern District of New York, case 1:26-cv-07978-RA

  1. - Suit by 22 states and the District of Columbia against the DHS public charge rule (in force since Sep 18, 2026). Related: City of New York v. DHS and Make the Road New York v. DHS.
  2. - The joint initial conference is set; there is no motion to enjoin or postpone the rule on the docket.

Who is covered: No one yet: there is no ruling.

What it means: The rule is in force: since Sep 18, 2026 only the 09/18/26 edition of I-485 is accepted, and officers assess public charge under the new rule.

Status as of Sep 30, 2026: Filed, no ruling, the rule is in force.

Agency document: Federal Register: the DHS public charge rule, published Jul 20, 2026, effective Sep 18, 2026

F-1 and J-1 students

Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration v. DHS

US District Court, District of Massachusetts, case 1:26-cv-13799-FDS

  1. - Order (ECF 51): the effective date of the DHS rule replacing duration of status with a fixed admission period for F, J and I is postponed, and DHS and ICE are enjoined from implementing it; vacatur denied for now.

Who is covered: All F-1 students, J-1 exchange visitors and I media representatives: the rule is postponed as a whole.

What it means: The old regime continues for now - admission for duration of status (D/S) without a separate USCIS extension.

Status as of Sep 30, 2026: The rule is postponed; next status conference Oct 2, 2026, no appeal on the docket.

Agency document: Federal Register: the DHS fixed admission period rule for F, J and I, Jul 17, 2026 (effective date postponed by a court on Sep 14, 2026)

DV lottery

Red Eagle Law v. Rubio

US District Court, Southern District of California, case 3:26-cv-04738-JO-VET

  1. - Suit asking the court to compel the State Department to resume the DV-2027 program (open registration).
  2. - Temporary restraining order denied without prejudice.
  3. - Oral ruling on the preliminary injunction is set (argued Sep 24).

Who is covered: For now only the plaintiff, a law firm.

What it means: DV-2027: the State Department has not announced entry dates; the suit could change that only after a ruling.

Status as of Sep 30, 2026: No ruling; an oral ruling is set for Oct 14, 2026.

Agency document: State Department: changes to the entry period for DV-2027 (Nov 5, 2025)

Work visas

State of California v. Mullin

US District Court, District of Massachusetts; US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, case 1:25-cv-13829-LTS; 26-1699

  1. - Judgment (ECF 106, 107): the suit of 20 states is granted; the DHS, USCIS and State Department documents that implemented the $100,000 H-1B payment (memos, FAQs, web pages, the G-1055 entry, the payment page) are vacated insofar as they impose the payment.
  2. - The court denied a stay but administratively stayed its judgment until the Court of Appeals rules (ECF 113).
  3. - The First Circuit (No. 26-1699) denied the government a stay pending appeal; by the government's own account in its Sep 15, 2026 motion, this reinstated the vacatur of the payment.
  4. - The President extended the proclamation itself (No. 11069) for 12 months - to Sep 21, 2027; published in the Federal Register on Sep 23, 2026.
  5. - The Court of Appeals denied the government's motion to reconsider the states' briefing extension; their answering brief is due Nov 4, 2026. No ruling on the merits of the appeal.

Who is covered: All H-1B employers and workers: the agency documents themselves are vacated, not only for the plaintiff states. The court did not strike the proclamation - it was extended on Sep 18, 2026.

What it means: The dispute is not over: the vacatur stands and the appeal is pending, while the USCIS H-1B page, updated Sep 21, 2026, still describes the pay.gov payment for workers outside the US. Employers check the procedure with counsel before filing for such a worker.

Status as of Sep 30, 2026: The vacatur stands; the appeal is undecided; the proclamation is extended to Sep 21, 2027.

Agency document: Federal Register: Proclamation 10973 of Sep 19, 2025 on the $100,000 H-1B payment; Federal Register: Proclamation 11069 of Sep 18, 2026 - the restriction extended to Sep 21, 2027; USCIS: H-1B specialty occupations

Green card inside the US

Soltanmohammadi v. Edlow

US District Court, District of Colorado, case 1:26-cv-03726

  1. - Suit against USCIS memo PM-602-0199 (AOS as "extraordinary relief"); the memo is attached to the complaint.

Who is covered: No one yet: there is no ruling.

What it means: The memo applies: officers weigh discretion more strictly on I-485 where the consular route is available.

Status as of Sep 30, 2026: Filed, no ruling; no court has blocked the memo.

Agency document: USCIS: policy memo PM-602-0199 of May 21, 2026 on discretion in adjustment of status (PDF)

What the chats said

In spring 2026 the DV chats argued whether a won suit would help everyone or only the plaintiffs. The worry proved half right: in Ivanov v. Trump relief went only to the named plaintiffs, while in Medani v. Trump the court in August certified a class of all DV-2026 selectees. In September the talk moved to re-interviews and to September 30 - by the community chat count for April-September 2026, mentions of September 30 and the fiscal-year end grew 2.5 times (92 and 234).

Frequently asked questions

Does a court ruling cover only the plaintiffs or everyone?
It depends. If the court vacated a rule as a whole (CLINIC v. Rubio, the F-1 duration-of-status postponement), it applies to no one. If a class is certified (Medani v. Trump, Red Eagle Law v. Edlow), everyone matching the class definition is covered. Otherwise only the named plaintiffs are: per the State Department cable of Sep 10, 2026 that was the case in Ivanov v. Trump - about 1,900 plaintiffs.
Can a court extend DV-2026 past September 30?
In Medani v. Trump the court wrote on Sep 10, 2026 that it makes no finding yet on whether it has that power, citing Goodluck v. Biden (2024), where the appeals court held courts lack it. There is no order holding visa numbers past Sep 30.
Will the 75-country pause come back?
Only if the Second Circuit stays or reverses the CLINIC v. Rubio judgment. The government's stay motion was filed on Sep 28, 2026 and is pending; the district court denied a stay on Sep 25.
Has the $100,000 H-1B payment been struck down?
Partly and not finally. On Jun 8, 2026 the Massachusetts court vacated the DHS, USCIS and State Department documents that imposed the payment (California v. Mullin), and on Jul 24, 2026 the First Circuit refused to stay that judgment. The appeal on the merits is undecided. The court did not strike the proclamation itself: on Sep 18, 2026 the President extended it to Sep 21, 2027, and the USCIS H-1B page, updated Sep 21, 2026, still describes the payment.
Is the September 18 public charge rule stopped?
No. The suit by 22 states and DC was filed on Sep 14, 2026, but there is no motion to enjoin on the docket and the first conference is on Oct 9, 2026. The rule is in force.

Where next

Sources

Court documents (orders and judgments with their docket entry numbers) were read from the federal courts' electronic records on Sep 30, 2026; the State Department position comes from its cable 26 STATE 88862 of Sep 10, 2026, filed in CLINIC v. Rubio (ECF 107-4).

This page is reference, not legal advice. Court cases move fast: rulings are appealed and stayed. Before acting, check agency notices and your consulate's instructions on uscis.gov.