A U.S. citizen does not have a fundamental liberty interest in her noncitizen spouse being admitted to the country, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Friday. Especially if that spouse is associated with a deadly gang and is reasonably thought to intend to break the law in the United States.
In Department of State v. Munoz, the justices were asked if Sandra Munoz, a U.S. citizen in Los Angeles, could invoke a “fundamental right of marriage.” The State Department does not deny that Muñoz (who is already married) has that fundamental right, but Munoz further claimed the right to reside with her noncitizen spouse in the United States — a man whom officials believe belongs to an international criminal gang.
Munoz is described as a prominent civil rights attorney in Los Angeles. Her husband, Luis Asensio-Cordero, is El Salvadoran, and during his interview with the consulate, officials conducted a body search and found tattoos indicating he is a member of the MS-13 gang. They denied him a green card.
“After conducting several interviews with Asencio-Cordero, a consular officer denied his application, citing §1182(a)(3)(A)(ii), a provision that renders inadmissible a noncitizen whom the officer ‘knows, or has reasonable ground to believe, seeks to enter the United States to engage solely, principally, or incidentally in’ certain specified offenses or ‘any other unlawful activity,’” the decision explained. Asencio-Cordero guessed that he was denied a visa based on a finding that he was a member of MS–13, a transnational criminal gang.
El Salvador is known to be infested with criminal gangs, with many members committing crimes in the United States.
Although Asencio-Cordero disavowed any gang membership and he and Muñoz pressed the consulate to reconsider the officer’s finding, the ruling stood, so they appealed to the Department of State, which agreed with the consulate’s determination. Asencio-Cordero and Muñoz then sued the Department of State and others (collectively, State Department), claiming that it had abridged Muñoz’s constitutional liberty interest in her husband’s visa application by failing to give a sufficient reason why Asencio-Cordero is inadmissible under the “unlawful activity” bar. The Department of State said it is not required to give a reason. The District Court granted summary judgment to the State Department, but the Ninth Circuit vacated the judgment, holding that Muñoz had a constitutionally protected liberty interest in her husband’s visa application.
The Supreme Court has overturned that ruling in an opinion written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett.
The 6-3 vote was opposed by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Jackson, the Democrat-appointed liberal women of the court who interpret then Constitution as granting the right to marry a gang member who is a non-citizen and then move that person to the United States to engaged in felonies.
