Pankajkumar S. Patel et al. v. Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General

Summary

The Supreme Court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction to review factual findings made in discretionary-relief proceedings under 8 U.S.C. § 1255 and the other provisions listed in 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i). The Court interpreted the statute's bar on reviewing "any judgment regarding the granting of relief" to encompass factual determinations underlying the denial of relief, while preserving review of constitutional claims and questions of law under § 1252(a)(2)(D). The Court affirmed the Eleventh Circuit's judgment.

Holdings

1. Federal courts lack jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) to review facts found as part of discretionary-relief proceedings under § 1255 and the other provisions enumerated in that subsection.
2. The presumption favoring judicial review does not apply because the text and statutory context of § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) clearly preclude judicial review of factual determinations in the discretionary-relief context.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) bars federal courts from reviewing factual findings made as part of discretionary-relief proceedings under 8 U.S.C. § 1255.
2. Whether the statutory exception in 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) preserves judicial review of factual questions underlying a denial of adjustment of status.

Disposition

affirmed