2026-08-22T07:40:14.803Z / 美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）
作者：汉娜·帕克
21分钟前发布
发布于 2026年8月22日，美国东部时间凌晨3:40
移民
查看所有话题
Facebook 推特 电子邮件 链接 Threads
链接已复制！
帕特里克·T·法伦/法新社/盖蒂图片社/资料图
2026年3月23日，乘客们在洛杉矶国际机场汤姆·布拉德利国际航站楼内推着随身行李走过值机柜台。
特朗普政府针对75个国家移民的签证禁令于周五被一名联邦法官驳回，法官裁定该禁令“违反法律”，且超出了国务卿马可·卢比奥的法定权限。
今年1月，美国国务院暂停向全球近40%的国家发放移民签证，包括巴西、哥伦比亚、埃及、海地、索马里和俄罗斯。美国国务院称此举旨在阻止那些“领取福利和公共福利”的人员入境。
曼哈顿联邦地区法院法官珍妮特·巴尔加斯对美国国务院出台该政策的理由提出质疑，推翻了仅以此为由拒绝的所有签证申请，这是特朗普政府移民打压政策的又一次挫折。
根据法律规定，移民官员只有在综合考量申请人的个人财务状况、年龄、健康状况、技能和家庭情况后，才能将其认定为大概率的“公共负担”（即预计依赖政府援助的人），进而拒绝其入境。
相关报道 2分钟阅读 美国暂停75个国家的移民签证办理
2026年1月13日，美国总统唐纳德·特朗普从密歇根州底特律返回后，在马里兰州安德鲁斯联合基地向记者发表讲话。伊夫林·霍克斯坦/路透社
巴尔加斯法官发现，实际上美国驻华领事馆官员被下令仅依据申请人的国籍就拒绝其签证申请，即便这些申请人有能力自给自足。
该签证禁令叫停了旨在与美国亲属团聚或赴美工作的永久居留签证申请，但不适用于旅游或学生签证等非移民签证。
卢比奥发给所有外交和领事机构的电报被纳入本案记录，该电报指示官员拒绝申请人，即便对方“提供了额外证据，证明其不会成为公共负担”。
“结果是预先注定的，”巴尔加斯写道，“签证会被拒绝。”她表示，该政策违反了1965年禁止在签证发放中存在国籍歧视的法律，也违反了另一项条款——该条款否认国务卿有权干涉领事官员对 individual 案件的裁决方式。
即便官员同时援引了该禁令，基于其他合法理由的拒签仍然有效，目前预计被推翻的拒签数量尚不明确。
亚伦·施瓦茨/法新社/盖蒂图片社
2026年7月31日，美国总统唐纳德·特朗普与美国国务卿马可·卢比奥（左）在马里兰州戴维营的内阁会议上发表讲话。
75个受影响国家大多为非欧洲国家，涵盖加勒比地区、撒哈拉以南非洲、巴尔干半岛、中东、中亚和东南亚，其中包括约旦、埃及和格鲁吉亚等多个美国盟友。美国国务院根据经济顾问委员会的数据制定了这份名单，目标锁定在移民家庭领取公共援助比例超过30%的国家。
本案原告包括六名美国公民，他们提交了家庭类移民申请，称该禁令阻止了他们在加纳、牙买加、危地马拉和埃塞俄比亚的亲属获得签证。还有五名通过工作类签证申请的哥伦比亚人，其中一人收到了援引该政策的拒签通知，他们也加入了本案。
政府在一个较窄的法律点上胜诉，法官同意该政策不属于必须在实施前征求公众意见的正式规则。
在本案辩论中，政府法律团队援引了2018年最高法院的一项裁决，该裁决维持了特朗普第一任期第三版旅行禁令，该禁令禁止多个国家的国民入境，其中大多数为穆斯林占多数的国家。但巴尔加斯表示，该案的核心是总统决定哪些人可以入境的权力，而此次签证禁令案则基于一个不同的问题：签证是否可以发放。
巴尔加斯是前总统乔·拜登任命的法官，她要求双方在9月11日前就如何解决本案剩余争议提出方案。政府可以对该裁决提起上诉。
美国有线电视新闻网已联系司法部和白宫置评。
Trump’s 75-country immigrant visa ban struck down by judge
2026-08-22T07:40:14.803Z / CNN
By Hanna Park
21 min ago
PUBLISHED Aug 22, 2026, 3:40 AM ET
Immigration
See all topics
Facebook Tweet Email Link Threads
Link Copied!
Passengers push carry-on bags past flight check-in desks inside the Tom Bradley International Terminal at Los Angeles International Airport in Los Angeles on March 23.
Patrick T. Fallon/AFP/Getty Images/File
The Trump administration’s ban on visas for immigrants from 75 countries was struck down by a federal judge on Friday, who ruled it was “contrary to law” and outside the statutory authority of Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
In January, the State Department paused the issuance of immigrant visas from almost 40% of the world’s nations – including Brazil, Colombia, Egypt, Haiti, Somalia and Russia – in a move that it said would prevent the entry of people who would “take welfare and public benefits.”
Judge Jeannette Vargas of the Federal District Court in Manhattan took issue with the State Department’s rationale for the policy, reversing any visa denial based solely on it – in another setback to the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.
Under the law, an immigrant can only be turned away as a likely “public charge” (someone expected to depend on government support) after a consular officer weighs that person’s own finances, age, health, skills and family situation.
Related article President Donald Trump speaks to reporters, on his return from Detroit, Michigan, at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, on January 13, 2026. Evelyn Hockstein/Reuters US suspending immigrant visa processing for 75 countries 2 min read
Judge Vargas found that, in practice, US officers were ordered to reject visas for applicants, even those who could support themselves, solely based on the country they came from.
The visa ban halted permanent-residence visas for people joining family members or taking jobs in the US, but did not apply to nonimmigrant visas such as tourist or student visas.
A cable that Rubio sent to every diplomatic and consular post, and which was entered into the case record, directed officers to refuse applicants even when someone “provides additional evidence that demonstrates he or she overcomes the public charge refusal.”
“The outcome is predetermined,” Vargas wrote. “The visa will be refused.” The policy, she said, ran afoul of a 1965 law barring discrimination by nationality in granting visas, and of a separate provision denying the secretary of state any say over how consular officers decide individual cases.
Denials that rested on other legal grounds stand, even where an officer also cited the ban, leaving the number of reversals expected unclear.
President Donald Trump, alongside US Secretary of State Marco Rubio (left), speaks during a Cabinet meeting at Camp David in Maryland, on July 31.
Aaron Schwartz/AFP/Getty Images
Most of the 75 countries are non-European, spanning the Caribbean, sub-Saharan Africa, the Balkans, the Middle East, Central Asia and Southeast Asia, and count several US partners among them, including Jordan, Egypt and Georgia. The State Department drew its list from Council of Economic Advisers data, targeting nations where more than 30 percent of immigrant households received some form of public assistance.
Among the plaintiffs were six US citizens who filed family-based petitions and said the ban blocked relatives in Ghana, Jamaica, Guatemala and Ethiopia from obtaining visas. Five Colombians who had applied through job-based visas, one of whom received a denial notice that cited the policy, were also part of the case.
The administration did win on one narrower point, with the judge agreeing the policy was not the kind of formal rule that must be opened to public comment before being implemented.
In arguing their case, the administration’s legal team leaned on a 2018 Supreme Court decision upholding the third version of Trump’s first-term travel ban, which barred entry by nationals of several countries, most of them majority-Muslim. But Vargas said that case turned on the president’s power to decide who may enter the country, whereas the visa ban case rested on a different question: whether a visa may be issued at all.
Vargas, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, gave both sides until September 11 to propose how to resolve what remains of the case. The administration can appeal the ruling.
CNN has reached out to the Justice Department and the White House for comment.
发表回复