US Supreme Court ruling sets back visa application for underaged immigrants

By Staff Writer | Jun 09, 2014 06:47 PM EDT

The US Supreme Court's ruling on Monday has made the visa application of nearly all underage immigrants more lengthy than before. CNN said that the nation's high court declared that almost all underage immigrants who have been waiting for visas to stay in the country would need to reapply and start the process all over again once they reach the age of 21.

The case had dealt with the issue of minors can seek permanent status under a family preference provision even though they have managed to "age out" due to the often very lengthy visa approval process. Immigration supports have argued that minors have a right to appeal to the agency's order to reassign their application to the adults-only category without going through a separate application.

CNN said that the current federal Immigration and Nationality Act allows adult immigrants who are now US citizens or lawful permanent resident aliens to petition for selected family members to obtain immigration visas to live in the US or to have their visas adjust to that of a lawful permanent resident alien.

The news outlet said that the decision on the case had proven difficult for the justices, as they were five different interpretations of the federal law at issue in the bloc. The majority had agreed with the stance of the Obama administration, arriving at the conclusion that the Board of Immigration Appeals' interpretation of "ambiguous language" in the immigration application rules was reasonable. CNN notes that in cases of ambiguity, courts like the Supreme Court often side with an agency's interpretation.

Referring to the situation of an applicant "ageing out" during waiting for his visa approval, Justice Elena Kagan said, "In the unavoidably zero¬-sum world of allocating a limited number of visas, the board could decide that he belongs behind any alien who has had a lengthier stand-alone entitlement to immigrate. Were we to overturn the board in that circumstance, we would assume as our own the responsible and expert agency's role. We decline that path."

More Sections