The Department of State is aware of the four court orders regarding the reservation of numbers for and/or adjudication of DV-2020 and DV-2021 diversity visas, as summarized below. The Department is appealing these court orders because the Department believes the courts misinterpreted the law in finding that the Department’s policies were unlawful, and that the courts exceeded their authority in ordering the Department to process and issue diversity visas beyond the statutory deadline. While the appeal is pending, the courts granted stays with respect to adjudicating visas from prior years, meaning that the Department is not required to adjudicate visas from prior years until the appeals court issues its decision. The courts, however, required the Department to complete the systems modifications necessary to process DV cases from prior years, which the Department will do in compliance with the court orders. The Department will publish additional public guidance regarding these cases should it be necessary to do so.
Here is a summary of the court orders referenced above:
On August 17, 2021, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Gomez v. Biden ordered the Department to “process DV-2020 applications in random order until all 9,095 diversity visas have been granted.” On October 13, 2021, the Court ordered the Department to “commence processing the 9,095 DV-2020 visas as soon as is feasible and to conclude such processing no later than the end of the 2022 Fiscal Year, or September 30, 2022.” On April 5, 2022, the court extended the stay until the appeals court announces its decisions. In the interim, and as also ordered by the court, the Department is completing the necessary systems modifications to process DV cases from prior years.
On September 27, 2021, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Rai v. Biden ordered the Department of State to “reserve 966 diversity visa numbers of applicants awaiting adjudication at the twenty-seven embassies and posts previously subject to Proclamations 9984 and 10143 and Defendants’ regional No-Visa Policy.” The 27 posts identified in the Court’s order are: 1) Amsterdam, 2) Athens, 3) Bern, 4) Bratislava, 5) Brussels, 6) Budapest, 7) Dublin, 8) Frankfurt, 9) Guangzhou, 10) Helsinki, 11) Hong Kong, 12) Johannesburg, 13) Lisbon, 14) Ljubljana, 15) London, 16) Madrid, 17) Naples, 18) Paris, 19) Prague, 20) Reykjavik, 21) Riga, 22) Rio de Janeiro, 23) Stockholm, 24) Tallinn, 25) Vienna, 26) Vilnius, and 27) Warsaw. On October 20, 2021, the Court ordered the Department to “begin processing and adjudicating the 966 reserved fiscal year 2021 diversity visa applications as soon as it is reasonably feasible to do so. Defendants shall complete the processing and adjudication of those 966 applications by the end of fiscal year 2022.” On October 20, 2021, the Court ordered the Department to “begin processing and adjudicating the 966 reserved fiscal year 2021 diversity visa applications as soon as it is reasonably feasible to do so. Defendants shall complete the processing and adjudication of those applications by the end of fiscal year 2022.” On April 6, 2022, the Court stayed the order until the appeals court announces its decisions. In the interim, and as also ordered by the Court, the Department is completing the necessary systems modifications necessary to process DV cases from prior years.
On September 30, 2021, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in the Goodluck v. Biden-related matters ordered the Department of State to “reserve 6,914 diversity visas for adjudication pending final judgment in the Goodluck-related matters.” On April 18, 2022, the court decided to stay the Goodluck litigation until the appeals court announces its decision.
On September 30, 2021, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in Goh v. Biden ordered the Department of State to “make 481 diversity visas available for adjudication” and to “adjudicate those diversity visas by the close of Fiscal Year 2022.” On April 6, 2022, the court extended the stay until the appeals court announces its decisions. In the interim, and as also ordered by the Court, the Department is completing the necessary systems modifications to process DV cases from prior years.