A federal judge has ordered the State Department to reconsider approved family-reunification cases and issue travel documents to relatives of Afghan asylum recipients without applying presidential entry restrictions. The November 2, 2026 ruling offers concrete relief to the families who sued, but does not itself admit every Afghan family member to the United States.
What the court ordered
In A.R.R. v. Rubio, U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta ruled for six Afghan nationals granted asylum in the United States in 2023 and their spouses and children remaining in Afghanistan. USCIS had approved the relatives’ Form I-730 petitions. Yet, after interviews between July and December 2025, State Department consular officers refused to issue the boarding foils needed for travel.
Officials had relied on Presidential Proclamation 10949, which restricted entry by nationals of 19 countries, including Afghanistan. A later proclamation, 10998, continued restrictions affecting Afghan nationals.
Judge Mehta ordered the government to re-adjudicate the relatives’ cases and produce boarding foils within 45 days, without considering those proclamations. The court retained jurisdiction and required the parties to report on compliance by December 17, 2026. The order permits additional lawful compliance measures.
Why the families won
The November ruling followed a separate July 29 decision by a federal court in Virginia, which set aside the State Department’s policy of applying the entry restrictions to follow-to-join asylees. On October 1, the Fourth Circuit declined the government’s emergency request to pause that ruling.
In the Washington case, the government argued that the earlier decision made the lawsuit unnecessary because the families could seek reconsideration. Judge Mehta disagreed: the government was still appealing the Virginia ruling, and a separate judgment would protect these plaintiffs against renewed application of the restrictions.
The judge entered judgment for the plaintiffs under the Administrative Procedure Act after the government declined to defend the challenged denials on their merits. This was a merits ruling, not merely a temporary restraining order.
Who may benefit
The immediate 45-day order applies to the plaintiffs in A.R.R. v. Rubio. It does not automatically issue documents to every Afghan national with an approved petition. However, the earlier Virginia ruling, which the government acknowledged remained in effect, has broader implications for the treatment of follow-to-join asylum beneficiaries.
Form I-730 allows qualifying people granted asylum or refugee status in the United States to petition for eligible spouses and unmarried children. An approved petition is an important step, but relatives abroad still must complete overseas processing and obtain the required travel documentation. The State Department explains that a boarding foil is placed in a passport or other travel document for an approved beneficiary.
What families should know
Families with approved I-730 petitions who have been denied travel documents based on the entry proclamations should preserve their USCIS approval notices, consular correspondence, and interview records. The court's ruling is not a substitute for an individual case review, and it does not guarantee entry or waive other lawful screening requirements.
The next concrete deadline in this case is December 17, when the parties must report to the court on compliance. The government's appeal of the earlier Virginia ruling also remains relevant.
Sources
U.S. District Court, A.R.R. v. Rubio, Memorandum Opinion, November 2, 2026
International Refugee Assistance Project, A.A. litigation timeline