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 addressed whether federal courts have jurisdiction to review the revocation of a visa petition based on a sham-marriage determination. The Court concluded that such revocations are discretionary decisions under § 1155 and fall within the purview of § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), which limits judicial review. The Eleventh Circuit's decision affirming the agency's revocation was upheld.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Bouarfa v. Mayorkas.
The Court held that revocation of an approved visa petition under § 1155 is a discretionary decision, thus barring 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 Administrative Law is relevant to Bouarfa v. Mayorkas
The case revolves around the discretion granted to the Secretary of Homeland Security under § 1155 to revoke visa petitions, which is a matter of administrative law.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)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), which strips federal courts of jurisdiction to review certain actions 'in the discretion of' the agency.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Bouarfa v. Mayorkas
The case discusses the limits of judicial review over discretionary agency decisions, specifically under § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii).
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Section 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) bars judicial review of decisions 'made discretionary by legislation.'
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Bouarfa v. Mayorkas
The case involves the procedural aspect of whether the revocation of a visa petition can be reviewed by courts, which touches on procedural due process concerns.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Bouarfa challenged the agency's revocation in federal court. 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.'
Congress did not impose specific criteria or conditions limiting this authority, nor did it prescribe how or when the Secretary must act.