Case 2:17-cv-00135 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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)