By Samantha Paul A Maine physician identified in court papers under the pseudonym Roya Afshar has filed a federal lawsuit after U.S. border authorities refused to allow her back into the United States following a brief crossing into Canada. The dispute involves her H-1B immigration status, questioning about her Iranian family background and the government’s alleged reliance on terrorism-related grounds of inadmissibility.
Afshar, an Iranian-born Canadian citizen, says she had been legally living and working in Presque Isle, Maine, as a family medicine physician since 2022. Her lawsuit argues that U.S. Customs and Border Protection improperly excluded her despite her valid immigration documentation and that the decision has left her separated from her home, family and patients.
Why Did Roya Afshar Cross the U.S.-Canada Border?
According to the complaint, Afshar legally entered the United States in December 2022 under H-1B nonimmigrant status and began working as a physician in northern Maine.
Her H-1B authorization was renewed in November 2025. The problem arose when she tried to renew her Maine driver’s license in February 2026.
Afshar says the Maine Bureau of Motor Vehicles told her its records had not been updated to reflect her renewed immigration status. When the issue reportedly remained unresolved nearly two months later, she decided to travel to the Fort Fairfield port of entry on April 8, 2026.
Her lawsuit says she briefly crossed into Canada and then attempted to reenter the United States so that her immigration documentation could be updated.
What Happened at the Fort Fairfield Border?
Afshar says she presented a valid Canadian passport along with documentation showing her renewed H-1B status when she attempted to return.
Instead of being admitted, according to her complaint, she was sent for additional inspection and questioned for approximately 10 hours.
The questioning allegedly focused heavily on Iran and members of her family. Afshar claims she cooperated with border officials but was ultimately told that she was inadmissible to the United States.
She also alleges that she was not allowed to consult an attorney during the process before being released back into Canada.
Why Did U.S. Border Officials Allegedly Deny Her Entry?
The most significant part of the case concerns what are known as Terrorism-Related Inadmissibility Grounds, or TRIG.
U.S. immigration law contains broad restrictions that can prevent a person from entering the country because of specified terrorist activities, organizations, associations or certain relationships to people covered by those provisions.
Afshar’s complaint alleges that CBP relied on TRIG when declaring her inadmissible, although she says authorities did not clearly identify the precise statutory provision supporting the decision.
The lawsuit argues that the terrorism-related determination was legally unsupported.
Lawsuit Focuses on Her Mother’s Work in Iran
Afshar believes the government’s decision was connected to her mother’s employment with the Iranian government approximately 45 years ago.
Her lawsuit says her mother worked for a nonmilitary government agency. Afshar argues that this historical employment does not establish a lawful terrorism-related basis for preventing her from entering the United States.
The complaint further states that her family has opposed Iran’s ruling regime. Afshar says her father was an opponent of the regime and that her father-in-law was executed by Iranian authorities.
She also says she left Iran for Canada in 2008 and has no intention of returning to Iran. These statements are allegations contained in her court case and have not yet been established through a final judicial ruling.
Who Is Roya Afshar?
“Roya Afshar” is the name being used by the plaintiff in the litigation rather than a confirmed public identification of the physician.
Court documents describe her as a 52-year-old dual citizen of Canada and Iran who established a life in Presque Isle after entering the United States legally in 2022.
She works in family medicine, while her husband is also described as a physician in the area. The couple live with their 12-year-old daughter.
The lawsuit emphasizes another practical issue created by the exclusion: both physicians provide medical services in a part of Maine where access to healthcare professionals is already limited. Afshar says being unable to return has kept her away from her patients as well as her family, home and possessions.
When Was the Roya Afshar Lawsuit Filed?
The complaint was entered on the federal docket in July 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine.
The case is titled Afshar v. Stamper et al., case number 1:26-cv-00372.
The defendants named in the complaint are Derrick Stamper, associated with the U.S. Border Patrol’s Houlton Sector; CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott; and Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin.
The federal docket identifies the case as an action involving review under the Administrative Procedure Act, including 5 U.S.C. § 702.
What Is Afshar Asking the Court to Do?
Afshar wants the federal court to reject the legal basis used to prevent her from returning to the United States.
The complaint asks the court to determine that the border agency’s action was unlawful, arbitrary and capricious and that terrorism-related inadmissibility grounds do not legally support the decision against her.
She also seeks reasonable attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses and other relief the court considers appropriate.
The case is therefore primarily a challenge to a federal immigration decision rather than a conventional lawsuit seeking a large personal-injury damages award.
Can a Valid H-1B Approval Guarantee Entry Into the United States?
A central legal question in the case is the difference between having approved immigration status or documentation and being legally admissible at a U.S. port of entry.
An approved H-1B petition does not necessarily eliminate the government’s authority to examine whether a person is admissible under other provisions of federal immigration law.
TRIG provisions are particularly broad and can create immigration consequences in circumstances involving specified terrorist activity, support, organizational involvement and certain covered family relationships. Federal law also provides limited exemptions in some circumstances.
Afshar’s case does not necessarily dispute the government’s general authority to perform such screening. Her central argument is that the specific terrorism-related basis allegedly applied to her does not fit the facts or applicable law.
Current Status of the Roya Afshar Border Lawsuit
As of August, 2026, Afshar v. Stamper remains a recently filed federal case. The publicly available docket shows the complaint and related initial filings, including a request concerning the sealing of unredacted exhibits. No widely reported final ruling has yet determined whether CBP acted unlawfully or whether Afshar must be permitted to return to the United States.
The lawsuit could become an important immigration case because it raises questions about the limits of terrorism-related inadmissibility rules when the government’s concerns are allegedly based on decades-old employment or associations involving a visa holder’s relatives. For Afshar, however, the immediate issue is much more personal: whether she can return to the Maine community where she says she lawfully built her career, family life and medical practice.