Blinken

Council on American-Islamic Relations California v. Blinken

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 26, 20222:22-cv-01500California4,577 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 COUNCIL ON AMERICAN-ISLAMIC No. 2:22-cv-01500-TLN-KJN RELATIONS, CALIFORNIA, et al., 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER v. 14 ANTONY BLINKEN, in his official capacity as U.S. Secretary of State, et al., Defendants. 17 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Council on American-Islamic Relations, California, Council on American-Islamic Relations, Sacramento Valley/Central California, and approximately 159 Iranian FY-2022 diversity visa selectees and their derivatives (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”). (ECF No. 12.) Defendants Antony Blinken, sued in his capacity as the United States Secretary of State, and Morgan D. Miles, sued in his capacity as the Director of the Kentucky Consular Center (“KCC”), (collectively, “Defendants”) filed an opposition. (ECF No. 14.) Plaintiffs filed a reply. (ECF No. 18.) For the reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion.

Defendants request to file an…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.