Summary
The Supreme Court held that the Secretary of Homeland Security's decision to revoke an approved visa petition based on a sham-marriage finding constitutes a discretionary action under 8 U.S.C. § 1155. Because the statute grants broad discretion, the revocation falls within the jurisdiction-stripping provision of 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), which precludes federal courts from reviewing such discretionary immigration decisions. The Court affirmed the lower court's dismissal of the petitioner's challenge.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a revocation of an approved visa petition under 8 U.S.C. § 1155, based on a later sham-marriage determination, is a decision made in the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security.
- Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) strips federal courts of jurisdiction to review that discretionary revocation.
Holdings
- Section 1155 grants the Secretary broad discretion to revoke an approved visa petition at any time for what the Secretary deems good and sufficient cause.
- Section 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) bars federal-court review of the Secretary's discretionary revocation of an approved visa petition under § 1155.
- Section 1154(c) does not create an ongoing duty to revoke an already approved petition when the agency later determines that the beneficiary had previously entered a sham marriage.
Key quotations
“It is clear on the face of §1155 that the revocation provision is a quintessential grant of discretion to the Secretary.” (604 U.S. at 6)
“Such a revocation is thus “in the discretion of ” the agency. §1252(a)(2)(B)(ii).” (604 U.S. at 12)
“Where §1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) applies, then, it bars judicial review of the Secretary’s revocation under §1155.” (604 U.S. at 12)
Factual background
Amina Bouarfa, a United States citizen, filed a visa petition seeking permanent-resident status for her noncitizen spouse, Ala'a Hamayel. USCIS initially approved the petition but later discovered evidence that Hamayel had previously entered a marriage for the purpose of evading immigration laws. USCIS revoked the approval under § 1155, and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed after finding substantial and probative evidence of a sham marriage.
Procedural history
USCIS initially approved Bouarfa's visa petition for her noncitizen spouse, then issued a notice of intent to revoke after discovering evidence that the spouse had previously entered a sham marriage to obtain immigration benefits. USCIS revoked the approval under 8 U.S.C. § 1155, and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed. The federal District Court dismissed Bouarfa's APA action for lack of jurisdiction under § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed. The Supreme Court affirmed the Eleventh Circuit.