Kerry v. Din

Fauzia Din

U.S. citizen who petitioned for her Afghan husband’s immigration visa

Kanishka Berashk

Din's husband, denied a visa due to alleged terrorism affiliation under §1182(a)(3)(B)

8 U.S.C. §1182(a)(3)(B)

Statutory provision excluding individuals involved in terrorist activities

Facially legitimate and bona fide reason

Legal standard from Mandel requiring only a valid and good-faith explanation for visa denial

Plurality opinion

An opinion with the most votes among justices but not a majority (less than 5)

Scalia plurality

Found no constitutional liberty interest in living with a noncitizen spouse in the U.S.

Kennedy concurrence

Assumed a liberty interest but held that the government met the required legal standard

Mandel standard

Courts defer to consular visa denials if the reason is facially legitimate and bona fide

Due process claim

Din argued that the lack of detailed explanation violated her liberty rights

Judicial deference

The Court’s practice of not second-guessing the Executive in immigration decisions

No right to live with spouse in U.S.

Key holding from the Court—immigration law does not guarantee this

Marks rule

When there is no majority, the narrowest concurring opinion controls the case outcome