U.S. Immigration Risk Casts Shadow Over 2026 World Cup, Prompting Questions Over FIFA’s Host-Nation Selection Criteria

Fans Abandon U.S. Travel Despite Holding Tickets
Entry Restrictions Extend to Players and Referees
Border Policies Generate Unintended Consequences for the World Cup

The United States' hardline immigration policies have emerged as a new variable for the 2026 FIFA World Cup. Fans from several countries are finding themselves unable to enter the United States despite purchasing match tickets, while participating national teams and even FIFA-appointed referees have encountered visa and entry-related obstacles. As host-country border policies begin to affect tournament operations, concerns are mounting over both competitive fairness and the event’s commercial success.

Access Divided by Nationality

According to an analysis of BBC World Service travel data published on June 10, more than a quarter of the countries that qualified for the World Cup are either subject to U.S. entry bans or face heightened visa restrictions. Citizens of Haiti, Iran, Senegal, and Côte d’Ivoire have seen their national teams qualify for the tournament, yet remain unable to attend matches held in the United States. Washington currently does not permit the issuance of visas required for World Cup tourism to citizens of those countries.

Iraq represents a different case, where visas remain theoretically available but access to the United States is effectively blocked. Following the outbreak of conflict in the Middle East, the United States suspended consular services in Iraq due to security concerns, leaving Iraqis with no practical means of obtaining U.S. visas. Abdullah Adnan, an Iraqi football fan, purchased World Cup tickets immediately after Iraq secured its first World Cup qualification since 1986 in late March. He ultimately abandoned plans to travel after discovering he could not obtain a visa domestically. Adnan traveled to Jordan to apply at the U.S. Embassy there, only to be informed that visa issuance was unlikely for non-Jordanian citizens.

Even some Scottish supporters, who ordinarily require only Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) approval rather than a visa, have encountered travel disruptions. Several fans reported that their ESTA status unexpectedly changed from “approved” to “travel not authorized” shortly before departure, resulting in disrupted travel plans and financial losses. Frustration extends to supporters from countries eligible for U.S. visas as well. Citizens of certain developed nations can apply for ESTA under the Visa Waiver Program and pay a fee of just $40. By contrast, nationals from countries ineligible for ESTA must pay $185 in visa application fees and undergo in-person interviews.

Even completing the complex visa process does not guarantee entry into the United States. Applications are frequently denied without clear explanation, while some travelers have reportedly been refused entry upon arrival. Abu Qas, president of the Jordan Football Supporters Association, submitted more than 42 supporting documents to the U.S. Embassy in pursuit of a visa but was ultimately denied. “This World Cup is not for us,” he said. “If even the president of a supporters’ association cannot obtain a visa, then who can?”

Day-Only Visas for Iran’s National Team, Entry Denied to Africa’s Top World Cup Referee

Visa barriers have affected not only supporters but also participating teams and FIFA-appointed match officials. Iran’s national team faces the prospect of commuting by air on match days because of visa restrictions. Iran, which will play all three of its group-stage matches in the United States, established its base camp in Mexico after Washington reportedly agreed to issue visas permitting players to remain in the United States only on match days. Abolfazl Pasandideh, Iran’s ambassador to Mexico, warned that repeated long-distance travel would inevitably fatigue players. “Transportation challenges and lost time could affect our team’s performance,” he said.

There was also a case in which a FIFA-appointed World Cup referee was denied entry and sent back. Omar Artan, the first Somali referee selected to officiate at a World Cup, was refused admission to the United States. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) confirmed that “a Somali national scheduled to serve as a referee during the World Cup arrived at Miami International Airport on a flight from Istanbul and was denied entry.” While the CBP statement did not identify the individual by name, Artan is the only Somali national assigned as a referee for this World Cup.

Artan, who has served as a FIFA referee since 2018, was named African Football Confederation (CAF) Referee of the Year last year. He was set to become the first Somali official ever to referee at a World Cup. Despite holding a valid U.S. visa and having obtained a diplomatic passport from the Somali Embassy in Nairobi, Artan was reportedly denied entry upon arrival at Miami International Airport and immediately placed on a return flight to Istanbul.

The decision appears to have been influenced by strained diplomatic relations between the United States and Somalia. Somalia is among the countries previously targeted under travel restrictions introduced by U.S. President Donald Trump. According to the Daily Mail, Trump has repeatedly expressed hostility toward Somalia. The newspaper reported that he referred to Somalia as “the worst country in the world” in January and described Somali immigrants as “all fraudsters” last month. CBP stated that it was aware Artan was a World Cup referee but said only that he “failed to satisfy required verification procedures during secondary inspection conducted after arrival.”

America’s Visa Barrier Disrupts the World Cup

The controversy is also creating significant challenges for FIFA. Historically, the organization has evaluated host nations primarily on physical infrastructure such as stadiums, transportation networks, and accommodation capacity. The 2026 World Cup has introduced a new consideration: the extent to which a host country’s immigration and border policies can influence the success of the tournament. FIFA has already awarded the 2030 World Cup to Spain, Portugal, and Morocco, while Saudi Arabia will host the 2034 edition. The 2030 tournament, in particular, will be staged across Europe and North Africa through a joint-hosting model. Should any host nation tighten entry procedures, spectators and tourism demand could shift toward alternative host countries.

In a multi-country hosting framework, policy differences can quickly become competitive differences. If one host nation strengthens immigration screening or expands restrictions on certain nationalities, spectators and tourism flows are likely to gravitate toward countries with more accessible entry policies. That would create disparities in accessibility despite all countries sharing host status. Such imbalances could directly affect attendance figures and economic benefits across host cities. A key advantage of joint hosting—distributing demand—could instead produce uneven outcomes.

For FIFA, the issue is directly tied to the tournament’s commercial appeal. The World Cup is not merely a domestic event hosted by a single nation; it is a global product aimed at football fans worldwide. If access to matches varies by nationality and travel barriers increase, ticket sales, tourism revenue, and sponsor exposure could all be affected. As a result, continued controversy may ultimately force FIFA to revise its host-selection criteria. “Because the World Cup is a global event, a host country’s visa policy inevitably becomes part of tournament operations,” one sports policy expert said. “FIFA will increasingly view such policies as a significant risk factor.”