Back

EB-5 Litigation Update Post #4: DHS Secretary Mayorkas Ratifies 2019 EB-5 Modernization Rule

April 20th, 2021 Peter Bibler

Behring’s case against DHS challenging the validity of the 2019 EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program Modernization Rule is currently pending in federal district court. The next court date is May 6, 2021 when the court is expected to issue a final ruling.

When last in court on March 25, 2021, US magistrate judge converted Behring’s motion for a preliminary injunction to that of summary judgment on the legal issue whether the 2019 EB-5 Modernization Rule is invalid because it was promulgated by acting DHS officials who were appointed in violation of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 (“FVRA”). The court asked the parties to submit written briefs on the applicability of the de facto officer doctrine and on the appropriate remedies should the court vacate the rule.

In the interim, on April 1, 2021, DHS notified the court that newly appointed DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas made a last-minute ratification of the action of former acting DHS secretary Kevin McAleenan, i.e. affirming the EB-5 Final Rule. Mayorkas stated that this was done in recognition of recent court decisions holding that acting DHS officials, including McAleenan, were unlawfully appointed, and therefore, any actions taken by them are invalid.

Notably, DHS Mayorkas has not ratified any of the other actions invalidated by the other courts.

Behring Argues the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 Does Not Allow Ratification

Behring, through its attorneys at Greenberg Traurig, has notified the court that it does not agree the ratification is valid and submitted arguments against DHS’s ratification and de facto officer defense. The next court date is May 6, 2021 unless the magistrate judge decides to rule on the briefs alone without further oral argument.

In short, Behring argues that the FVRA does not allow prior actions of an unlawfully appointed official in violation of the FVRA to be ratified. Congressional anticipated such post-hoc efforts by the Executive Branch to try to correct prior violations, and in enacting the FVRA in 1998, Congress expressly stated in the Act that if “any person” performs “any function or duty” of a vacant office covered by the FVRA, without validly serving as an acting officer under the FVRA or an agency’s succession statute (here, the Homeland Security Act (HSA)), then that action “shall have no force or effect” and “may not be ratified.” See 5 U.S.C. § 3348(d)(1)-(2).

Here, McAleenan’s designation as Acting Secretary of DHS was not in compliance with the order of succession in effect as authorized under the HSA. This has been confirmed by 5 other courts. Moreover, McAleenan’s actions in promulgating the 2019 Rule changing the investment criteria for the EB-5 Program was a “function or duty” under the FVRA, i.e. those function or duties that were expressly designated as non-delegable. In the 2019 EB-5 Rule, Acting DHS Secretary asserted that the exclusive authority to change the EB-5 investment criteria resides exclusively in the DHS Secretary. Thus, McAleenan’s actions fall within the express provisions of the FVRA and may not be subsequently ratified.

Even if the DHS Secretary’s ratification is accepted by the court as valid, it does not impact Behring’s additional claims that the 2019 EB-5 Rule violated the Administrative Procedure Act and the Regulatory Flexibility Act when, among other problems, DHS failed to adequately consider the economic effects the 2019 EB-5 Rule as well as the failure to consider the absence of certainty created by an unworkable TEA designation process.

Behring wholly supports comprehensive EB-5 reform, but such reform must provide meaningful change to enhance the EB-5 Program, viz. by reducing USCIS processing times, solving retrogression, protecting against child age-out, and implementing integrity measures to strengthen investor protections. The 2019 EB-5 Modernization Rule is unsustainable in its current form and fails to cure address these issues.

Behring hopes that a favorable decision from the court will provide EB-5 stakeholders a new opportunity to work with Congress and DHS to find a meaningful solution to these challenges.

An overview of Behring’s USCIS lawsuit can be viewed here Click here.

If the EB-5 regulations are invalidated and the $500,000 investment amount is restored, it is likely only for a limited time. The sunset date for the EB-5 Regional Center Program is June 30, 2021. New legislation is expected to change the required investment amounts.  

Litigation Update Posts

USCIS Processing EAD/AP Applications for Regional Center Investors

USCIS has resumed adjudicating applications for employment authorization and advance parole travel documents for EB-5 regional center investors who have pending I-485 adjustment of status applications. This is a reversal from USCIS’s prior stance on holding such applications in abeyance after the EB-5 regional center program ended on June 30, 2021 until the program is

DHS Files Notice of Appeal in Behring Regional Center v Wolf

Today, DHS filed its notice of appeal on the last day before the 60-day window expired in Behring Regional Center v. Wolf et al. This is not cause for alarm, and EB-5 investors should not make hasty decisions and feel they must rush to make new EB-5 investments. Contrary to some reports already floating around,

USCIS reinstates Form I-526 from April 2019 with $500,000 investment amount: Too little too late for some.

Background: Behring Regional Center Vs. Chad Wolf et al. In November 2019, the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program experienced regulation changes that would prove to instantly stall the program from being used to invest, create jobs and immigrate. The new regulations included new regulations and increased investor and operating requirements. Most notably, the minimum investment amount

Behring Wins EB-5 Lawsuit, Court Vacates 2019 EB-5 Modernization Rule, $500,000 TEA’s

Behring Regional Center Secures Major Legal Win Against DHS: Court Vacates 2019 EB-5 Modernization Rule Download - Read the Decision Today, the US District Court for the Northern District of California ruled in favor of Behring Regional Center, vacating the 2019 EB-5 Modernization Rule. The court agreed that DHS had no authority to implement the ...

EB-5 Litigation Update Post #6: May 13, 2021 Hearing

Behring Regional Center had its final EB-5 hearing on May 13, 2021 before the US District Court for the Northern District of California in its lawsuit against DHS and USCIS. In Behring Regional Center vs. Wolf, et al, Behring seeks to block the 2019 EB-5 Modernization Rule that derailed the EB-5 Program’s reasonable operability and ...

EB-5 Litigation Update Post #5: Behring’s Litigation Glossary

Behring’s case against DHS is still pending. The government is expected to file a brief to reply to Behring’s arguments against the validity of DHS’s recent attempt to ratify the 2019 EB-5 Modernization Rule on April 22, 2021…

EB-5 Litigation Update Post #3: Behring seeks to overturn EB-5 Regs in USCIS lawsuit

Behring is in the news again for our latest efforts to improve the EB-5 industry in its EB-5 lawsuit against USCIS. This time is different though. We are not just innovating to offer better EB-5 investments, but to save the industry as a whole. After the new EB-5 rules started in November 2019, the industry ...

EB-5 Litigation Update Post #2: Biden’s Announced Immigration Priorities Gives Hope for Behring’s Push for a Revitalized EB-5 Program

Not wasting any time, on his first day as the 46th US President, Biden signed 17 Executive Orders and unveiled his priorities for immigration reform. Six orders addressed immigration. He immediately repealed the travel ban on majority-Muslim countries. He also halted construction of the border wall near the border with Mexico. Importantly, Biden announced proposed legislation to…

EB-5 Litigation Update Post #1: Behring challenges DHS authority to Enact EB-5 Modernization Rules

Behring argues, in part, that the EB-5 Modernization Rule is invalid because the purported heads of DHS and USCIS had not been duly appointed under the Presidential nomination and Senate consent process at the time they promulgated the Rule. The claim stems from the continued controversy at DHS and USCIS where a series of officials have taken on the positions only to resign later…   

EB-5 Litigation Updates Page

Behring Regional Center v. Wolf, et al.    Get the latest updates straight from the source.  Welcome to Behring’s EB-5 Litigation Update Page. Here, we aim to provide stakeholders in the EB-5 Program frequent updates on Behring’s lawsuit against the DHS stemming from the adverse effects of its implementation of the EB-5 Modernization Rule. See ...

 

Categories