## Facts

- Following the Iranian hostage crisis, the President directed special measures concerning Iranian nationals in the United States.
- The Attorney General issued 8 C.F.R. § 214.5 (Nov. 13, 1979), requiring all Iranian nonimmigrant postsecondary students to report to an INS office for identification and examination of immigration status by a specified date.
- The regulation required affected students to present evidence that they were maintaining nonimmigrant status in compliance with their admission conditions.
- Iranian students and an associated student organization filed consolidated suits, alleging the regulation unlawfully singled out Iranians by nationality and violated the Fifth Amendment and the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
- The district court held the regulation unconstitutional as impermissible national-origin discrimination under the Fifth Amendment and permanently enjoined enforcement and use of information obtained under the regulation.
- Federal officials appealed to the D.C. Circuit.

## Issues

1. Whether 8 C.F.R. § 214.5 violated equal protection principles embodied in the Fifth Amendment by requiring only Iranian nonimmigrant postsecondary students to report and verify status.
2. Whether the Attorney General had statutory authority under the INA to promulgate a nationality-specific reporting and status-verification regulation for nonimmigrant students.
3. Whether the regulation was arbitrary or irrational, and therefore invalid under due process-type rationality review.

## Decision

- The D.C. Circuit reversed the district court and directed dismissal of the complaints and entry of judgment for the government.
- The court held that the INA broadly authorizes the Attorney General to regulate nonimmigrant conduct and require appearance and information necessary to administer immigration law.
- The court sustained § 214.5 under a highly deferential standard applicable to immigration measures connected to foreign affairs.
- The court concluded the regulation had a rational basis in light of the hostage crisis and the government’s interests in foreign policy, national security, and immigration enforcement.
- The court noted the regulation required reporting and proof of compliance with existing visa conditions and did not itself order removal.

## Legal Principles

- In immigration matters, especially where foreign affairs and national security are implicated, courts give substantial deference to the political branches’ judgments.
- The Executive may, under broad INA delegations, impose reporting and information-production requirements on nonimmigrants to verify compliance with admission conditions.
- Nationality-based distinctions in immigration administration are generally reviewed for rationality and will be upheld unless wholly irrational or unrelated to legitimate governmental objectives.
- A regulation that targets a nationality group for status verification may satisfy the Fifth Amendment if it reasonably relates to legitimate foreign-policy, security, or immigration-control objectives.

## Conclusion

The D.C. Circuit upheld the Iranian-student reporting regulation as a valid exercise of delegated authority under the INA and as rationally related to legitimate foreign affairs and immigration enforcement concerns, rejecting the Fifth Amendment challenge and vacating the injunction.


Narenji v. Civiletti, 617 F.2d 745 (D.C. Cir. 1979)