Maria Del Carmen Medina Tovar v. Laura B. Zuchowski

Summary

The Ninth Circuit’s amended opinion affirmed summary judgment for the government in a dispute over when a spousal relationship must exist for derivative U-visa status. Applying Chevron, the court held that the governing statute is ambiguous and that USCIS reasonably required the relationship to exist when the principal U-visa petition was filed. The court also rejected the plaintiffs’ equal-protection challenge; Judge Watford dissented.

Holdings

1. The U-visa statute is ambiguous and does not directly answer when a qualifying spousal relationship must exist for derivative U-visa status.
2. The regulation requiring the qualifying spousal relationship to exist when the initial U-visa petition is filed and to continue through adjudication of the derivative petition is a reasonable interpretation of the ambiguous statute and is entitled to Chevron deference.
3. The regulation does not violate equal protection under the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the phrase "accompanying, or following to join" in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(U)(ii) unambiguously requires a qualifying spousal relationship to exist when the principal U-visa petition is filed or instead leaves a gap for the agency to fill.
2. Whether 8 C.F.R. § 214.14(f)(4), which requires the qualifying relationship to exist when the initial U-visa petition is filed and to continue through adjudication of the derivative petition and admission, is a reasonable interpretation of the U-visa statute.
3. Whether the regulation violates equal protection by treating derivative spouses differently from derivative children and from spouses of refugees, asylees, and other visa holders.

Disposition

affirmed