Summary
The Supreme Court held that the Secretary of Homeland Security's decision to revoke an approved visa petition based on a prior sham-marriage determination constitutes a discretionary action under 8 U.S.C. § 1155. Because the revocation falls within the agency's discretion, federal courts lack jurisdiction to review it under the jurisdiction-stripping provision of 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii). The Court concluded that the statute grants the Secretary broad authority to revoke approvals without imposing mandatory conditions or ongoing duties.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether revocation of an approved visa petition under 8 U.S.C. § 1155 based on a sham-marriage determination is a decision made in the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii).
- Whether federal courts have jurisdiction to review the Secretary's revocation of a previously approved visa petition when the revocation is based on a determination that the petition would have been barred by 8 U.S.C. § 1154(c) at the time of initial approval.
Holdings
- Revocation of an approved visa petition under 8 U.S.C. § 1155 is a decision made in the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security because the statute authorizes the Secretary to revoke approval at any time for what the Secretary deems good and sufficient cause.
- Section 1154(c) does not create an ongoing duty requiring USCIS to revoke a previously approved visa petition whenever the agency later determines that the beneficiary had entered into a sham marriage.
- The availability of judicial review under § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) does not depend on whether the agency routinely or consistently exercises its statutory revocation discretion in a particular manner.
- Section 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) strips federal courts of jurisdiction to review the Secretary's revocation of Bouarfa's approved visa petition under § 1155.
Key quotations
“It is clear on the face of § 1155 that the revocation provision is a quintessential grant of discretion to the Secretary.” (13)
“In § 1155, Congress granted the Secretary broad authority to revoke an approved visa petition “at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause.”” (19)
Factual background
Amina Bouarfa, a U.S. citizen, filed an immigrant visa petition for her noncitizen spouse, Ala'a Hamayel, and USCIS initially approved it. Approximately two years later, USCIS uncovered evidence that Hamayel had previously entered into a marriage for the purpose of evading immigration laws, including statements by his former spouse that the marriage was fraudulent. Despite Bouarfa's denial and the former spouse's later recantation, USCIS revoked the approval for good and sufficient cause under 8 U.S.C. § 1155, and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed.
Procedural history
USCIS initially approved Bouarfa's visa petition for her noncitizen spouse, later issued a Notice of Intent to Revoke based on evidence of a prior sham marriage, and revoked the approval under 8 U.S.C. § 1155. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed. The District Court dismissed Bouarfa's APA action as jurisdictionally barred, and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed in 75 F.4th 1157. The Supreme Court affirmed.