NOTE: This information is affected by new policies as of January 20, 2025 and will be updated soon.

Summary

**February 10, 2022 Update: We have reached a settlement agreement affecting Iranian religious minorities denied U.S. refugee resettlement. More information about the settlement and if your case is affected will be available here.**

This guide is for:

Iranian Christians, Mandaeans, and other religious minorities who traveled to Vienna at the invitation of the U.S. government to apply for refugee status through the HIAS program (also called the Lautenberg program and were:

• Denied in or after February 2018 “as a matter of discretion,” and family members in the United States sponsored their applications, or
• Denied under the Security Advisory Opinion (“SAO”) security vetting program by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (the “FBI”) after January 1, 2016. 

IRAP filed and settled a lawsuit challenging the mass denials in this program. This guide gives more information about the lawsuit.

Description of the lawsuit 

In April 2018, the International Refugee Assistance Project and the law firm Latham & Watkins filed a lawsuit. The lawsuit challenged the mass denial of refugee status to Iranian religious minorities who had traveled to Vienna to continue applying for refugee status. This refugee status is under the Lautenberg-Specter Amendment and administered by HIAS. 

Initially, the lawsuit covered people who received denials in or after February 2018 stating only that their applications were denied “as a matter of discretion.” An example of this type of denial is here.  

In June 2020, the lawsuit was amended to challenge unlawful changes to the Security Advisory Opinion screening. This is screening is conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”). Now the lawsuit also includes applicants who were denied under this new security vetting since January 1, 2016.

The 2018 complaint is available here. The 2020 amended complaint is available here. Information about the vetting change is available here. 

Who the lawsuit affects

People who bring a lawsuit are called named plaintiffs. The named plaintiffs are the refugee applicants who received denials and the U.S.-based family members who sponsored their applications.

The case is a class action. People who are similarly situated to the named plaintiffs are called class members. All class members will benefit from the case if the plaintiffs win. The court has determined that Latham Watkins LLP and the International Refugee Assistance Project are the lawyers for the plaintiffs and class members for the purposes of this lawsuit.

Class members from the first phase of the lawsuit

Class members from the first phase of the lawsuit are all Iranian refugees who:

• Applied for refugee admission to the United States under the Lautenberg Amendment, as a principal applicant or derivative relatives;
• Traveled to Vienna, Austria, for processing; and
• Received denials from the U.S. government in or after February 2018 with the sole explanation of:

“7. X OTHER REASON(S): After review of all the information concerning your case, including your testimony, supporting documentation, background checks, country conditions, and other available information, your application for refugee resettlement to the United States under INA § 207 has been denied as a matter of discretion.”

The class also includes the U.S. based close family members who submitted and sponsored those applications as U.S. ties.

 An example of this type of denial is here.  

Class members from the second phase of the lawsuit

Class members from the second phase of the lawsuit are all Iranian refugees who:

• Applied for refugee admission to the United States under the Lautenberg Amendment, as a principal applicant or derivative relatives;
• Traveled to Vienna, Austria, for processing; and
• Received denials under SAO security vetting conducted by the FBI after the change in SAO vetting was implemented beginning January 1, 2016.

The class also includes the U.S. based close family members who submitted and sponsored those applications as U.S. ties.

Status of the lawsuit

• On July 10, 2018, the court found that the case can proceed as a class action. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on some of the claims. The court found that the Notices of Ineligibility issued in or after February 2018 stating only that applications were denied “as a matter of discretion” are invalid. All class members should have received a Notice explaining the decision and the case, available here.
•  On July 24, 2018, the U.S. government re-issued notices to all refugee applicant class members from the first phase of the lawsuit. The notices stated that because of the court order in the Doe v. Nielsen lawsuit, the U.S. government has reopened their refugee applications and that the U.S. government would issue a new decision after it completes an additional review of the case record. The previously issued denial notices that phase one class members received in February 2018 stating only that they were denied “as a matter of discretion” are no longer in effect.
•  After the U.S. government reopened phase one class members’ refugee applications, some applicants were approved and traveled to the United States. Other applicants received new denial notices stating a new reason for their denial.
• From 2018 to 2020, the U.S. government provided information to our legal team about the changes to refugee security vetting that led to mass denials of refugee applications. This information allowed the legal team to amend the lawsuit for its second phase. It also informed IRAP’s report Debunking “Extreme Vetting”: Recommendations to Build Back the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (October 2020) and IRAP’s Two-Pager Extreme Refugee Vetting: FBI Bulk Communications Matching (June 2021).
• On June 16, 2020, the court allowed our legal team to amend the lawsuit. Our legal team alleged that the U.S. government unlawfully changed Security Advisory Opinion (“SAO”) security vetting conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigations (“FBI”) beginning January 1, 2016. Those changes led to mass refugee denials. The court also allowed our legal team to represent additional class members in the second phase of the lawsuit. Those new members are applicants who were denied under the new SAO security vetting conducted by the FBI and their U.S.-based family members who sponsored their applications.
• Following the judge’s March 31, 2021 decision on the government’s attempt to eliminate the remainder of the lawsuit, the parties reached a settlement agreement.
• On February 10, 2022, the judge approved a settlement agreement to end the lawsuit. Find more information about the settlement agreement and learn if your case is affected here.

What may happen next to refugee applications

If you are a member of either the first or second group of class members, you should have received email messages from the International Refugee Assistance Project. These emails give updates about this lawsuit settlement, how it applies to you and your family, and how to contact our legal team with questions.

If you need information about how to submit a request for review, IRAP’s guide is here.

If you still have a pending application, IRAP’s guide on what to do with a long-delayed application is here. 

What else you can do if you are a class member 

Iranian religious minority applicants who have received refugee application denials may be able to pursue other legal options.

Family-Based Immigration

A person with a close relative in the U.S. who is a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident may be able to apply for family-based immigration. IRAP’s guide on that process is here.

Humanitarian Parole

You could also apply for humanitarian parole. Humanitarian parole is a process that allows individuals to enter the United States temporarily for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit.  Humanitarian parole is only given for exceptional cases. IRAP’s guide about humanitarian parole is available here.