{"id":10887,"date":"2026-08-25T12:37:08","date_gmt":"2026-08-25T16:37:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mclawfirm.com\/?p=10887"},"modified":"2026-08-25T12:41:08","modified_gmt":"2026-08-25T16:41:08","slug":"abdde-federal-mahkeme-75-ulkeye-yonelik-gocmen-vize-yasagini-iptal-etti","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mclawfirm.com\/tr\/abdde-federal-mahkeme-75-ulkeye-yonelik-gocmen-vize-yasagini-iptal-etti\/","title":{"rendered":"ABD’de Federal Mahkeme 75 \u00dclkeye Y\u00f6nelik G\u00f6\u00e7men Vize Yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131 \u0130ptal Etti"},"content":{"rendered":"

21 A\u011fustos 2026 tarihinde New York G\u00fcney B\u00f6lgesi Federal Mahkemesi (SDNY), ABD D\u0131\u015fi\u015fleri Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131’n\u0131n 75 \u00fclke vatanda\u015f\u0131na g\u00f6\u00e7men vizesi verilmesini ask\u0131ya alan politikas\u0131n\u0131 t\u00fcm\u00fcyle ve \u00fclke genelinde ge\u00e7ersiz k\u0131ld\u0131<\/span>. Karar, yaln\u0131zca politikay\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmakla kalmad\u0131; bu politikaya dayan\u0131larak verilmi\u015f vize retlerini de iptal ederek dosyalar\u0131n yeniden de\u011ferlendirilmesini emretti<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n

A\u015fa\u011f\u0131da karar\u0131n arka plan\u0131n\u0131, hukuki gerek\u00e7esini, kimleri kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve h\u00e2l\u00e2 belirsiz kalan noktalar\u0131 \u00f6zetliyoruz<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n

Arka Plan: Yasak Nas\u0131l Do\u011fdu?<\/strong><\/h2>\n

D\u0131\u015fi\u015fleri Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131, 14 Ocak 2026’da 75 \u00fclkenin vatanda\u015flar\u0131na g\u00f6\u00e7men vizesi verilmesini s\u00fcresiz olarak durduraca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 duyurdu; uygulama 21 Ocak 2026’da y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girdi<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n

Gerek\u00e7e olarak “kamu y\u00fck\u00fc” (public charge) \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct\u00fc g\u00f6sterildi. Bakanl\u0131k, bu \u00fclkelerden gelen g\u00f6\u00e7menlerin ABD’de kamu yard\u0131mlar\u0131na ba\u015fvurma olas\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n y\u00fcksek oldu\u011funu, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla tarama ve inceleme prosed\u00fcrlerinin yeniden g\u00f6zden ge\u00e7irilmesi gerekti\u011fini savundu.<\/strong> Dayanak olarak, s\u00f6z konusu \u00fclkelerden gelen g\u00f6\u00e7men hanelerinin \u00f6nemli bir b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fcn bir t\u00fcr kamu deste\u011fi ald\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair veriler \u00f6ne s\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n

Uygulamada ne oldu? Konsolosluk memurlar\u0131na, ba\u015fvuru sahibi t\u00fcm ko\u015fullar\u0131 sa\u011flasa ve hakk\u0131nda hi\u00e7bir uygunsuzluk gerek\u00e7esi bulunmasa bile, INA \u00a7 221(g) uyar\u0131nca vizeyi reddetme talimat\u0131 verildi.<\/strong> Yani m\u00fclakatlar yap\u0131lmaya devam etti, dosyalar a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131, ancak vize bas\u0131lmad\u0131<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n

Yasak, tek ba\u015f\u0131na k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck bir grubu de\u011fil, d\u00fcnya \u00fclkelerinin yakla\u015f\u0131k %40’\u0131n\u0131 kaps\u0131yordu. <\/span><\/p>\n

\n

ABD G\u00f6\u00e7men Vize Yasa\u011f\u0131 Kapsam\u0131ndaki 75 \u00dclke<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Afganistan<\/strong><\/td>\nAntigua ve Barbuda<\/td>\nArnavutluk<\/strong><\/td>\nAzerbaycan<\/strong><\/td>\nBahamalar<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Banglade\u015f<\/td>\nBarbados<\/td>\nBelarus<\/td>\nBelize<\/td>\nBosna-Hersek<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Brezilya<\/td>\nButan<\/td>\nCezayir<\/td>\nDemokratik Kongo Cum.<\/td>\nDominika<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Eritre<\/td>\nErmenistan<\/td>\nEtiyopya<\/td>\nFas<\/strong><\/td>\nFiji<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Fildi\u015fi Sahili<\/td>\nGambiya<\/td>\nGana<\/td>\nGine<\/td>\nGrenada<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Guatemala<\/td>\nG\u00fcney Sudan<\/td>\nG\u00fcrcistan<\/strong><\/td>\nHaiti<\/td>\nIrak<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u0130ran<\/strong><\/td>\nJamaika<\/td>\nKambo\u00e7ya<\/td>\nKamerun<\/td>\nKarada\u011f<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Kazakistan<\/strong><\/td>\nK\u0131rg\u0131zistan<\/strong><\/td>\nKolombiya<\/td>\nKongo Cumhuriyeti<\/td>\nKosova<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Kuveyt<\/td>\nKuzey Makedonya<\/strong><\/td>\nK\u00fcba<\/td>\nLaos<\/td>\nLiberya<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Libya<\/td>\nL\u00fcbnan<\/td>\nM\u0131s\u0131r<\/td>\nMo\u011folistan<\/td>\nMoldova<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Myanmar<\/td>\nNepal<\/td>\nNijerya<\/td>\nNikaragua<\/td>\n\u00d6zbekistan<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Pakistan<\/strong><\/td>\nRuanda<\/td>\nRusya<\/strong><\/td>\nSaint Kitts ve Nevis<\/td>\nSaint Lucia<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Saint Vincent ve Gren.<\/td>\nSenegal<\/td>\nSierra Leone<\/td>\nSomali<\/td>\nSudan<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Suriye<\/strong><\/td>\nTanzanya<\/td>\nTayland<\/td>\nTogo<\/td>\nTunus<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Uganda<\/td>\nUruguay<\/td>\n\u00dcrd\u00fcn<\/td>\nYemen<\/td>\nYe\u015fil Burun Adalar\u0131<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n

T\u00fcrkiye bu listede yer alm\u0131yordu; dolay\u0131s\u0131yla T\u00fcrk vatanda\u015flar\u0131 do\u011frudan bu yasaktan etkilenmedi.<\/strong> Ancak listedeki \u00fclkelerin vatanda\u015f\u0131 olan aile \u00fcyeleri, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar veya \u00e7ift vatanda\u015fl\u0131\u011fa sahip ki\u015filer a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan karar do\u011frudan sonu\u00e7 do\u011furuyor<\/strong><\/span>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Yasak yaln\u0131zca g\u00f6\u00e7men vizelerini (yani yurt d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki konsolosluk \u00fczerinden y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen ye\u015fil kart s\u00fcre\u00e7lerini) kaps\u0131yordu. Turistik, \u00f6\u011frenci ve ge\u00e7ici \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma vizeleri gibi g\u00f6\u00e7men olmayan vize kategorileri etkilenmedi<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n

Mahkeme Ne Dedi?<\/strong><\/h2>\n

H\u00e2kim Vargas’\u0131n gerek\u00e7esi birka\u00e7 ayak \u00fczerine kuruluyor<\/span>:<\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    Bakan\u0131n yetkisi a\u015f\u0131ld\u0131.<\/strong> INA \u00a7 104(a), D\u0131\u015fi\u015fleri Bakan\u0131’n\u0131 g\u00f6\u00e7 mevzuat\u0131n\u0131n uygulanmas\u0131yla g\u00f6revlendirirken, vize verme veya reddetme yetkisini a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a konsolosluk memurlar\u0131na b\u0131rak\u0131r. Mahkemeye g\u00f6re Rubio’nun genelgesi bu istisnay\u0131 fiilen ortadan kald\u0131rd\u0131 ve memurlar\u0131n bireysel karar verme g\u00f6revini bir milliyet kural\u0131yla ikame etti<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    Yasal dayana\u011f\u0131 olmayan ret talimat\u0131 verildi.<\/strong> Federal d\u00fczenleme (22 C.F.R. \u00a7 40.6), bir vizenin ancak kanunda \u00f6zel olarak \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f bir gerek\u00e7eye dayan\u0131larak reddedilebilece\u011fini s\u00f6yl\u00fcyor. Politika ise b\u00f6yle bir gerek\u00e7enin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hallerde bile ret zorunlulu\u011fu getiriyordu<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  3. \n

    Milliyete dayal\u0131 ayr\u0131mc\u0131l\u0131k yasa\u011f\u0131 ihlal edildi.<\/strong> INA, g\u00f6\u00e7men vizesi verilirken milliyete dayal\u0131 ayr\u0131mc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 istisnalar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda yasakl\u0131yor. Mahkeme, politikan\u0131n \u00f6nce milliyete g\u00f6re reddetti\u011fini, ard\u0131ndan bu sonucu “kamu y\u00fck\u00fc” etiketiyle gerek\u00e7elendirdi\u011fini, oysa yasan\u0131n her ba\u015fvuran\u0131n kendi ko\u015fullar\u0131na g\u00f6re de\u011ferlendirilmesini emretti\u011fini belirtti<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  4. \n

    Karar\u0131n dili sert.<\/strong> Vargas politikay\u0131 “a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131” olarak nitelendirdi ve milliyete g\u00f6re kategorik ret uygulamas\u0131n\u0131n yasal d\u00fczenin do\u011frudan ihlali anlam\u0131na geldi\u011fini yazd\u0131. Habercilikte karar\u0131n baz\u0131 ifadeleri “Orwellvari” ba\u015fl\u0131klar\u0131yla aktar\u0131ld\u0131<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  5. \n

    2018 seyahat yasa\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7tihad\u0131ndan ayr\u0131ld\u0131.<\/strong> Mahkeme, Y\u00fcksek Mahkeme’nin Trump’\u0131n ilk d\u00f6nemindeki seyahat yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131 onayan karar\u0131n\u0131n cumhurba\u015fkan\u0131n\u0131n \u00fclkeye giri\u015fe ili\u015fkin yetkisiyle ilgili oldu\u011funu; bu davan\u0131n ise D\u0131\u015fi\u015fleri Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131’n\u0131n, yasaya g\u00f6re zaten uygun bulunmu\u015f ba\u015fvuru sahiplerine vize vermeyi reddedip reddedemeyece\u011fine ili\u015fkin oldu\u011funu vurgulad\u0131<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Devletin kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131 tek nokta:<\/strong> Mahkeme, politikan\u0131n kamu y\u00fck\u00fc h\u00fckm\u00fcyle do\u011frudan \u00e7eli\u015fti\u011fi iddias\u0131n\u0131 kabul etmedi; \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc memurun bu gerek\u00e7eyle ret verebilmesi i\u00e7in yine bireysel bir kamu y\u00fck\u00fc de\u011ferlendirmesi gerekiyordu<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Karar Pratikte Ne De\u011fi\u015ftiriyor?<\/strong><\/h2>\n
      \n
    • \n

      Yasak art\u0131k uygulanamaz.<\/strong> Konsolosluklar, listedeki \u00fclkelerin vatanda\u015flar\u0131 i\u00e7in g\u00f6\u00e7men vize i\u015flemlerini yeniden y\u00fcr\u00fctmek durumunda<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n

    • \n

      Sadece bu politikaya dayanan retler iptal edildi.<\/strong> Bu dosyalar esastan yeniden de\u011ferlendirilmek \u00fczere geri g\u00f6nderildi<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n

    • \n

      Ba\u015fka gerek\u00e7elere dayanan retler ge\u00e7erlili\u011fini koruyor.<\/strong> Ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z bir uygunsuzluk gerek\u00e7esi varsa karar bunu ortadan kald\u0131rm\u0131yor<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n

    • \n

      Di\u011fer yasaklar kapsam d\u0131\u015f\u0131.<\/strong> 1 Ocak 2026’da y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 39 \u00fclkelik seyahat yasa\u011f\u0131, 23 Aral\u0131k 2025’te ba\u015flayan \u00e7e\u015fitlilik vizesi (DV) duraklamas\u0131 ve di\u011fer vize t\u00fcrlerine ili\u015fkin k\u0131s\u0131tlamalar bu davan\u0131n konusu de\u011fildi; y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte kalmaya devam ediyor<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n

    • \n

      Bu ikinci mahkeme karar\u0131, ilk iptal.<\/strong> 31 Temmuz 2026’da bir ba\u015fka federal h\u00e2kim de politikay\u0131 hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bulmu\u015f, ancak yaln\u0131zca dar kapsaml\u0131 bir \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm sa\u011flam\u0131\u015ft\u0131. SDNY karar\u0131 ise politikay\u0131 b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcyle ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131yor<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      Belirsizli\u011fini Koruyan Noktalar<\/h2>\n

      Temyiz: <\/strong>D\u0131\u015fi\u015fleri Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 karar\u0131 temyiz edebilir ve temyiz s\u00fcreci boyunca karar\u0131n y\u00fcr\u00fctmesinin durdurulmas\u0131n\u0131 (stay) talep edebilir. Bu ger\u00e7ekle\u015firse tablo yeniden de\u011fi\u015febilir.<\/p>\n

      Uygulama h\u0131z\u0131: <\/strong>Konsolosluklar yakla\u015f\u0131k yedi ayd\u0131r biriken dosyalar i\u00e7in yeniden m\u00fclakat planlamas\u0131 yapmak zorunda. Pratikte normale d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f kademeli olacak.<\/p>\n

      Kamu y\u00fck\u00fc kurallar\u0131 ayr\u0131 bir ba\u015fl\u0131k:<\/strong> \u0130\u00e7 G\u00fcvenlik Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131’n\u0131n (DHS) Temmuz 2026’da yay\u0131mlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve 15 Eyl\u00fcl 2026’da y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girecek olan, ABD i\u00e7inden stat\u00fc de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fi (adjustment of status) ba\u015fvurular\u0131na ili\u015fkin kamu y\u00fck\u00fc d\u00fczenlemesi bu karardan etkilenmiyor. Yani ister yurt d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndan g\u00f6\u00e7men vizesiyle, ister ABD i\u00e7inden stat\u00fc de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fiyle ba\u015fvurulsun, mali durum, sa\u011fl\u0131k, ya\u015f, e\u011fitim, sigorta gibi unsurlar\u0131n yak\u0131ndan incelenmesi beklentisi s\u00fcr\u00fcyor<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n

      Kimler Ne Yapmal\u0131?<\/h2>\n
        \n
      • \n

        Ba\u015fvurusu bu politika nedeniyle reddedilenler:<\/strong> Dosyan\u0131z\u0131n karara dayanarak yeniden de\u011ferlendirmeye al\u0131n\u0131p al\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 takip edin; konsolosluk yaz\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n\u0131z\u0131 ve ret bildiriminizdeki gerek\u00e7e kodunu (\u00f6zellikle 221(g)) saklay\u0131n<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n

      • \n

        M\u00fclakat\u0131 bekleyenler:<\/strong> Randevu planlamas\u0131nda hareketlenme olabilir; konsolosluk sayfalar\u0131n\u0131 ve CEAC durum ekran\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fczenli kontrol edin<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n

      • \n

        \u0130\u015fverenler ve \u0130K\/global mobilite ekipleri:<\/strong> \u0130stihdam temelli g\u00f6\u00e7men vize dosyalar\u0131nda ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihlerini yeniden planlarken temyiz riskini de hesaba kat\u0131n<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n

      • \n

        Herkes i\u00e7in:<\/strong> Bu yaz\u0131 genel bilgilendirme ama\u00e7l\u0131d\u0131r, hukuki tavsiye de\u011fildir. Kendi dosyan\u0131za ili\u015fkin karar almadan \u00f6nce bir ABD g\u00f6\u00e7menlik avukat\u0131na dan\u0131\u015fman\u0131z yerinde olur<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

        21 A\u011fustos 2026 tarihinde New York G\u00fcney B\u00f6lgesi Federal Mahkemesi (SDNY), ABD D\u0131\u015fi\u015fleri Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131’n\u0131n 75 \u00fclke vatanda\u015f\u0131na g\u00f6\u00e7men vizesi verilmesini ask\u0131ya alan politikas\u0131n\u0131 t\u00fcm\u00fcyle ve \u00fclke genelinde ge\u00e7ersiz k\u0131ld\u0131. Karar, yaln\u0131zca politikay\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmakla kalmad\u0131; bu politikaya dayan\u0131larak verilmi\u015f vize retlerini de iptal ederek dosyalar\u0131n yeniden de\u011ferlendirilmesini emretti. A\u015fa\u011f\u0131da karar\u0131n arka plan\u0131n\u0131, hukuki gerek\u00e7esini, kimleri […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":10897,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10887","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-legal"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mclawfirm.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10887","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mclawfirm.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mclawfirm.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mclawfirm.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mclawfirm.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10887"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/mclawfirm.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10887\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10896,"href":"https:\/\/mclawfirm.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10887\/revisions\/10896"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mclawfirm.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10897"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mclawfirm.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10887"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mclawfirm.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10887"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mclawfirm.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10887"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}