However, the more damaging aspect of the statement (and also an email sent to the legal team regarding named plaintiffs), is the statement regarding the five Covid travel restrictions (China, Iran, the Schengen Area, the UK, Ireland, or Brazil). The statement says the restrictions remain in force, that is correct and not challenged by the order. However, the policy (and email) say that people at embassies in those areas will not be issued visas because of the travel restriction. I believe Judge Mehta covered this under his ruling showing the no-visa policy as being unlawful, and point 1 of the order (in my opinion) was crafted in a way that should allow issuance of visas including within the five restricted regions (as listed). I have reached out to the lawyers to get their insight into that, and will report back anything I hear. I have further suggested they seek clarity from Judge Mehta on this point. However until that clarity is received, people within the five listed areas will still be blocked by the policy, so I hope the policy will quickly be changed, one way or another.
http://britsimonsays.com/department-o...-guidance/
http://britsimonsays.com/department-o...-guidance/
Изменено:
- 10.09.2020 06:45:23(добавлена ссылка)
