Bouarfa v. Mayorkas
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Bouarfa v. Mayorkas and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Bouarfa v. Mayorkas.
In Bouarfa v. Mayorkas, the Supreme Court reviewed whether federal courts have jurisdiction to review the revocation of a visa petition based on a sham-marriage determination. Amina Bouarfa's visa petition for her spouse was initially approved but later revoked by USCIS, citing a previous sham marriage. The District Court and the Eleventh Circuit ruled that judicial review was barred under § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), which excludes certain discretionary agency decisions from court review. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision, emphasizing the discretionary nature of the agency's authority under § 1155.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Bouarfa v. Mayorkas.
The Court held that the revocation of an approved visa petition based on a sham-marriage determination is a discretionary decision under § 1155, which is not subject to judicial review under § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii).
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Bouarfa v. Mayorkas. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Due Process is relevant to Bouarfa v. Mayorkas
The case involves the procedural aspect of judicial review and the discretion of agency decisions, which relates to due process considerations.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The District Court dismissed the suit, holding that § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii)—a provision that strips federal courts of jurisdiction to review certain discretionary agency decisions—barred judicial review of the agency's revocation.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Bouarfa v. Mayorkas that support the summary and concepts above.
Revocation of an approved visa petition under § 1155 based on a sham-marriage determination by the Secretary is the kind of discretionary decision that falls within the purview of § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii).
Section 1155 is a quintessential grant of discretion: The Secretary 'may' revoke a previously approved visa petition 'at any time' for what the Secretary deems 'good and sufficient cause.'
The presumption that administrative action is subject to judicial review may be overcome by 'clear and convincing evidence' of congressional intent to preclude judicial review.