A legal battle unfolds as a couple challenges the U.S. government’s immigration procedures, alleging misconduct and bad faith in handling their visa applications. The complaint was filed by Byanka Aguirre and Mohamed Amine Benhrima on September 18, 2025, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio against Donald J. Trump, Kristi Noem, Kika Scott, Andrew Davis, and other officials.
The plaintiffs, Aguirre and Benhrima, are contesting a series of actions taken by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) that they claim were executed in bad faith. Their story begins with Benhrima’s entry into the United States on an F-1 student visa in December 2013. He married his former spouse Jama Zamzam in June 2014 but faced challenges when USCIS issued a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) his I-130 petition based on allegations of a fraudulent marriage. Despite Zamzam’s affidavit affirming the marriage’s legitimacy, USCIS persisted with its denial.
After divorcing Zamzam in October 2015, Benhrima married Aguirre in August 2016. They filed new petitions which were also met with resistance from USCIS, culminating in another NOID based on INA section 204(c). This provision bars approval if there is evidence of a prior fraudulent marriage to evade immigration laws. However, Aguirre and Benhrima argue that this decision was unfounded given Zamzam’s later statements retracting her accusations against Benhrima.
The plaintiffs assert that these actions violated their due process rights under the Fifth Amendment and caused significant emotional and financial distress. They accuse DHS attorneys of acting in bad faith by continuing to label Benhrima’s previous marriage as fraudulent despite evidence to the contrary. Furthermore, they highlight procedural failures such as delays and improper communication during their case processing.
Aguirre and Benhrima seek multiple forms of relief from the court: declarations that their due process rights were violated; injunctions preventing further barring of Benhrima’s admission into the U.S.; orders compelling consular action on his immigrant visa application; recognition that no I-212 waiver is necessary; compensation for legal costs; and any additional relief deemed appropriate by the court.
Represented by attorney Ghassan M. Shihab from Shihab & Associates, this case brings attention to potential flaws within immigration adjudication processes affecting families like Aguirre’s across America. The case is presided over by Judge Gwin under Case ID: 1:26-cv-00330.
Source: 126cv00330_Aguirre_v_Trump_Complaint_Northern_District_Ohio.pdf
