Those who’ve worked/fought/bled in Afghanistan know that foreign forces both here and in Iraq owe a debt of undying gratitude to the interpreters who made life a lot easier for coalition troops. Many of those interpreters, or “terps” because we like to shorten things because words hard, are now trying to get to the United States because people still in the graveyard of better judgment would like to kill them.
But there a lot of other Afghans who worked in other ways for the Americans who are also trying to leave the country. I worked with more than a couple of them at one point, and someday I’ll have to vent just enough of the overwhelming ermahgerdness that is that whole process. It’s a decision making process that has to involve an angry gibbon and a dartboard.
And now, for one Afghan couple, SCOTUS gets to hear about it.
Home-care worker Fauzia Din married an Afghan man in 2006 and wanted him to join her in Fremont, Calif. But the State Department turned down his visa application – and it won’t say exactly why.
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear Din’s case Monday to decide whether a U.S. citizen has a right to know why her spouse has been barred from entering the country.
“I want to know the reason why my husband is not able to live with me,” Din, 44, said in a telephone interview. “My husband is a gentle man. He is the opposite of a terrorist.”
He’d been told he’d get his visa quickly, but then it was denied for “terrorist activities.” Probably his fault, because someone who once clerked at the Afghan Ministry of Social Welfare during the Time Of The Taliban is the kind of person who’s eventually going to take a whack at the Mall of the Americas. And here’s where the legal system gets downright adorable.
Under U.S. immigration law, foreigners have no right to enter the U.S. or receive an explanation if they are denied a visa. Decisions made by consular officials generally cannot be reviewed in court. But some judges have said a U.S. citizen has a limited right to be told why a close relative was turned down.
Then in 2014, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals saw things in Din’s favor: marriage is one of those things protected by the Constitution. Which means she gets to have someone tell her why her husband’s visa’s been denied, in John Kerry v. Fauzia Din. Should make a great movie someday.
Former consular officers have gone to bat for her, saying that many of these visas are denied based on databases. Instead of an actual decision being made by a human. I refer you once again to the angry gibbon and the dartboard.