AfghanEvac warns US court ruling does not reopen door for Afghans

AfghanEvac has welcomed a US federal court ruling that overturned a State Department policy suspending immigrant visa processing for nationals of 75 countries, including Afghanistan, but warned that the decision does not reopen the main pathway to the United States for most Afghan applicants.

In a statement issued on Saturday, August 22, AfghanEvac President Shawn VanDiver said the August 21 ruling in Catholic Legal Immigration Network (CLINIC) v. Rubio correctly found that the government had ordered consular officers to refuse applicants who had already been determined to be eligible for immigrant visas based on their country of birth.

However, VanDiver stressed that the policy struck down by the court is separate from a broader entry proclamation that took effect on January 1, 2026.

“What the court struck down is the 75-country visa pause that took effect January 21, 2026,” VanDiver said. “What remains fully in force is the entry proclamation that took effect January 1, 2026.”

According to AfghanEvac, that proclamation suspends the entry of Afghan nationals and does not provide a broad categorical exemption for Afghan Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) holders. The organization said the entry proclamation was not before the court and therefore was not affected by the ruling.

“For most Afghan families, the door did not open yesterday,” VanDiver said.

AfghanEvac urged applicants and their families not to make travel arrangements, visit US embassies or consulates without scheduled appointments, or take action based solely on media reports.

The organization also warned applicants against withdrawing or refiling applications or paying individuals who claim that US immigration pathways for Afghans have reopened.

VanDiver said that applicants whose visa refusals were based solely on the now-vacated 75-country suspension could have their cases returned to a consular officer for a new decision.

However, he stressed that there is no deadline or guarantee that those applications will ultimately be approved.

Applicants whose refusals were based on other grounds, including the separate entry proclamation, remain in the same position as before the court ruling, AfghanEvac said.

“This ruling does not solve the problem,” VanDiver said. “It removes one unlawful barrier and leaves the central one standing.”

AfghanEvac called on the US State Department to provide clear guidance to diplomatic posts and to readjudicate cases returned to consular officers following the court ruling.

The organization also called on the Trump administration to restore an exemption for Afghan allies who have already earned Special Immigrant Visas and urged Congress to take further action.

VanDiver said Afghan allies who worked alongside US forces should not be left in legal uncertainty after having served the United States.

The court decision therefore represents a significant change for some immigrant visa applicants, but AfghanEvac cautioned that it should not be interpreted as a general reopening of US entry for Afghan nationals or as an immediate lifting of restrictions affecting Afghan SIV holders.