Page 39 - The Indian EYE 022026

IMMIGRATION FEBRUARY 20, 2026 | The Indian Eye 39

lish that the scholarly publications the Supreme Court brought about uously received awards recognizing parameters of the regulatory crite-
in themselves are also extraordinary the demise of Chevron deference. her status or kept up with that lev- ria or reverse its prior acceptance of
in order to qualify as a person of ex- The Court in Mukherjee v. el of production. The Court finds evidence under the regulatory cri-
traordinary ability. This is a circular Miller while reviewing the merits nothing in the statutory scheme that teria. Prior to Mukherjee v. Miller,
argument, which Kazarian appro- of the USICS’s decision held that it would support such a finding.” most courts have clung onto the fi-
priately shot down. If Kazarian just was an arbitrary and capricious de- It remains to be seen whether nal merits determination even when
stopped there, it would have been a cision. The reviewing officer hailed other courts will also be nudged by reversing the USCIS denial (as in
wonderful outcome. Unfortunate- to articulate the required standard Loper Bright to disregard the US- Scripps College), but now future
ly, Kazarian had been interpreted and the failure to meet the standard CIS’s final merits determination. In courts have Loper Bright on their
to also require a vague and second by the plaintiff. It appeared that the Scripps College v. Jaddou, a case side to not pay deference to the fi-
step analysis known as the “final plaintiff did not meet the final mer- decided just prior to Loper Bright, nal merits determination while still
merits determination,” which can its because she failed to indefinite- the Court did not discard the final relying on Kazarian to shoot down
stump even the most extraordinary. ly stay at the top of her field. The merits analysis but still overturned the circular argument, which is that
Now Mukherjee v. Miller has Court held that “[I]t is clear that the USCIS by holding that USCIS one does not need to submit ex-
relied on Loper Bright to hold that the Plaintiff in this case was at the cannot and should not, under the traordinary evidence under one of
the final merits determination was top of her field. No one argues that cover of the second step final merits the ten criteria to establish extraor-
unlawful although many courts have is not accurate. The Agency based determination, be allowed to intro- dinary ability.
adopted it. Even the Fifth Circuit its decision on whether she contin- duce new requirements outside the
in Amin v. Mayorkas adopted the ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
final merits determination, based Cyrus D. Mehta, a graduate of Cambridge University and Columbia Law School, is the Managing Partner of Cyrus D. Mehta
upon which it upheld the denial of & Partners PLLC in New York City. Mr. Mehta is a member of AILA’s Administrative Litigation Task Force; AILA’s EB-5 Com-
Mr. Amin’s extraordinary ability mittee; former chair of AILA’s Ethics Committee; special counsel on immigration matters to the Departmental Disciplinary
petition even though he met three Committee, Appellate Division, First Department, New York; member of the ABA Commission on Immigration; board member
of the ten criteria. The Fifth Circuit of Volunteers for Legal Services and board member of New York Immigration Coalition. Mr. Mehta is the former chair of the
held that the USCIS did not violate Board of Trustees of the American Immigration Council and former chair of the Committee on Immigration and Nationality
the APA by not adopting a formal Law of the New York City Bar Association. He is a frequent speaker and writer on various immigration-related issues, including
rule as the final merits determi- on ethics, and is also an adjunct professor of law at Brooklyn Law School, where he teaches a course entitled Immigration and
nation was an interpretive rather Work. Mr. Mehta received the AILA 2018 Edith Lowenstein Memorial Award for advancing the practice of immigration law
than a legislative rule and do it did and the AILA 2011 Michael Maggio Memorial Award for his outstanding efforts in providing pro bono representation in the
not need to go through notice and immigration field. He has also received two AILA Presidential Commendations in 2010 and 2016. Mr. Mehta is ranked among
comment. The Fifth Circuit issued the most highly regarded lawyers in North America by Who’s Who Legal – Corporate Immigration Law 2019 and is also ranked
Amin v. Mayorkas in 2022 before in Chambers USA and Chambers Global 2019 in immigration law, among other rankings.

www.TheIndianEYE.com