The restriction on Kazakhstanis has been lifted. A US federal court has struck down a State Department policy that had suspended the issuance of immigrant visas to citizens of Kazakhstan and 74 other countries since January, DKNews.kz reports.
On August 21, US District Judge Jeannette Vargas of the Southern District of New York issued the ruling. The court decision states that the State Department policy conflicted with US immigration law and exceeded the authority granted by law to Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Kazakhstan Was Among the 75 Countries
The State Department introduced the restriction on January 21, 2026. The official list of 75 countries included Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Russia, Pakistan, Brazil, Thailand and dozens of other states.
The restriction applied specifically to immigrant visas, which are intended for people planning to move permanently to the United States. Tourist, business and other nonimmigrant visas were not covered by this particular measure.
For Kazakh citizens, that distinction is significant: the January decision did not amount to a suspension of all categories of US visas.
Interviews Continued, but Visas Could Still Be Denied
One of the most controversial aspects was how the restriction worked in practice.
Consulates continued interviewing applicants and reviewing their cases. But if an applicant was a citizen of one of the 75 countries, the State Department policy required the immigrant visa to be denied even when no other ground for refusal had been identified.
According to the court documents, the rule could apply even when a consular officer, after an individual assessment, did not consider the applicant likely to become a “public charge” and found that the person otherwise met the relevant requirements.
The State Department justified the measure by arguing that nationals of the listed countries posed a higher risk of relying on US public benefits and government resources. The nationality-based nature of that policy became one of the central issues before the court.
Court Says Rubio Could Not Override Consular Decisions
US immigration law places decisions on whether to issue or refuse a visa in the hands of consular officers. The court concluded that the Secretary of State could not impose a mechanism that effectively predetermined the outcome of a case solely on the basis of an applicant’s nationality.
“The Policy, which categorically prohibits the issuance of immigrant visas based upon the nationality of the applicant, represents a direct abrogation of this statutory scheme,” the court said.
The judge found the policy unlawful and set it aside under the US Administrative Procedure Act.
Previous Refusals May Also Be Reconsidered
The ruling does not apply only to future applications.
If an immigrant visa was refused solely because of the challenged policy, that refusal must be set aside and the case returned to consular officers for reconsideration.
However, the ruling does not mean visas will now be issued automatically.
If an applicant has another lawful ground for refusal under US immigration law, that decision may remain in place. The court made clear that cases involving separate legal grounds for denial are not automatically overturned simply because the January policy was also cited.
For applicants from Kazakhstan, the practical change is clear: Kazakh citizenship alone can no longer serve as the basis for denying an immigrant visa under the now-invalidated policy.
Restriction Covered Nearly 40% of the World’s Countries
The January measure was unusually broad in scope. Court documents indicate that it affected nationals of nearly 40% of the world’s countries.
That means the ruling extends far beyond the individual plaintiffs. The policy covering all 75 countries has been struck down, while refusals based solely on that rule must return to individual review.
Earlier, we explained why Kazakhstan was included among the 75 countries and which specific categories of US visas were affected by the restrictions. The court has now invalidated the core mechanism behind that January policy.
