Ask A Lawyer

Tell Us Your Case Information for Fastest Lawyer Match!

Please include all relevant details from your case including where, when, and who it involoves.
Case details that can effectively describe the legal situation while also staying concise generally receive the best responses from lawyers.


By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Email, Phone, Text Messages, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided may not be privileged or confidential.

Visa Sanctions Triggered Against Four Countries Deemed Deficient in Accepting Return of Nationals

by Alexander J. Segal on Feb. 19, 2019

Immigration Immigration  Deportation Immigration  Visa 

Summary: On August 22, 2017, Stephen Dinan of The Washington Times reported that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had exercised its authority under section 243(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to trigger visa sanctions against four countries...

immigration attorney nycOn August 22, 2017, Stephen Dinan of The Washington Times reported that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had exercised its authority under section 243(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to trigger visa sanctions against four countries found to be recalcitrant in accepting the return of their nationals [link][1]. In accord with the statute, the DHS notified the U.S. Department of State (DOS), which will have responsibility for imposing the visa sanctions.

Although both the DHS and DOS declined to name the four countries, Dinan reported that the countries affected are Cambodia, Eritrea, Guinea, and Sierra Leone. Prior to the instant use of section 243(d), the authority had only been used twice: first by the Bush administration against Guyana in 2001 and second by the Obama administration last year against Gambia. In both cases, the visa sanctions were narrowly targeted against government officials and family members thereof. However, it is important to note that section 243(d) provides authority to issue far-reaching sanctions.

President Donald Trump made this an issue during his presidential campaign [see blog] and addressed it in his January 25, 2017 Executive Order on interior enforcement [see article]. At the end of 2016, over twenty countries were listed as being recalcitrant in accepting the return of their nationals. However, as of May 2017, the only twelve were determined to still be problematic. In addition to the Cambodia, Eritrea, Guinea, and Sierra Leone, the following nine (counting Hong Kong) were also listed as being non-compliant as of May 2017:

- Burma
- China
- Cuba
- Hong Kong
- Iran
- Laos
- Morocco
- South Sudan
- Vietnam

It is worth noting that Iran is subject to separate visa restrictions under President Trump's Executive Order 13780 [see article].

It remains to be seen what are the extent of the sanctions imposed on Cambodia, Eritrea, Guinea, and Sierra Leone and whether they will bring the four countries into compliance. In general, anyone facing removal from the United States should consult with an experienced immigration attorney for case-specific guidance. We will update the website with more information on these developments as they become available.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

1. Dinan, Stephen. “Trump to stop travel from countries that refuse to help Homeland Security.” The Washington Times. Aug. 22, 2017. Washingtontimes.com

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Legal Articles Additional Disclaimer

Lawyer.com is not a law firm and does not offer legal advice. Content posted on Lawyer.com is the sole responsibility of the person from whom such content originated and is not reviewed or commented on by Lawyer.com. The application of law to any set of facts is a highly specialized skill, practiced by lawyers and often dependent on jurisdiction. Content on the site of a legal nature may or may not be accurate for a particular state or jurisdiction and may largely depend on specific circumstances surrounding individual cases, which may or may not be consistent with your circumstances or may no longer be up-to-date to the extent that laws have changed since posting. Legal articles therefore are for review as general research and for use in helping to gauge a lawyer's expertise on a matter. If you are seeking specific legal advice, Lawyer.com recommends that you contact a lawyer to review your specific issues. See Lawyer.com's full Terms of Use for more information.