A U.S. District Judge in Ohio has issued a preliminary injunction against the Trump administration, ordering U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to resume the processing of immigration benefit applications for 25 foreign nationals already residing in the United States. The ruling, delivered by Judge Algenon L. Marbley on July 6, 2026, marks the latest in a series of judicial setbacks for administration policies that had indefinitely stalled adjudications based on an applicant’s country of origin.
Legal Context and Judicial Findings
The lawsuit brought by the 25 plaintiffs—who include medical professionals, researchers, and university professors—challenged the government’s authority to maintain an indefinite “freeze” on applications for green cards, work permits, and other benefits. Judge Marbley’s order mandates that USCIS must evaluate these individual cases under existing immigration law rather than leaving them in what he described as “indefinite limbo.”
Judge Marbley distinguished this case from broader border enforcement authority, noting that the plaintiffs are already lawfully present in the U.S. “It is difficult to see how any asserted Government interest in public safety or national security would have any bearing on foreign nationals who are lawfully present in the United States and are following the Government’s requirements,” Marbley wrote in his opinion. The judge further noted that federal courts in jurisdictions including Rhode Island, California, and Massachusetts have reached similar conclusions regarding the illegality of these administrative freezes.
Stakes for Applicants
The injunction does not guarantee the approval of any specific benefit, but it removes a procedural barrier that had prevented applicants from receiving a decision. The court ordered that USCIS and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) must adjudicate pending Form I-765 employment authorization applications within 30 days and provide a compliance report to the court. For many, the ruling provides a path to resolving their status, which had been stalled due to policies that treated national origin as a negative factor in the adjudication process.
Broader Implications
The ruling also referenced public statements made by President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance, with Judge Marbley noting that the administration’s rhetoric appeared to reflect hostility toward immigrants from specific regions. While the administration has defended the policies as essential to national security and enhanced vetting, the court found that “national security cannot be a talisman used to ward off inconvenient claims.” The government is expected to face continued legal pressure as similar cases proceed through the federal court system, questioning the scope of executive authority over established immigration benefit pipelines.