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.
The Supreme Court reviewed whether federal courts have jurisdiction to review the Secretary of Homeland Security's discretionary decision to revoke a visa petition based on a sham-marriage determination. The Court found that such decisions fall under the discretion of the agency and are not subject to judicial review under § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii). The Eleventh Circuit's decision affirming the 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 based on a sham-marriage determination is a discretionary decision 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 Administrative Law is relevant to Bouarfa v. Mayorkas
The case primarily deals with the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security in revoking a visa petition, 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 involves the question of whether federal courts have jurisdiction to review the discretionary decision of the agency, implicating the concept of judicial review.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Section 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.
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Bouarfa v. Mayorkas
The case touches on procedural due process concerns regarding the revocation of a visa petition without judicial review.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)That distinction 'refects Congress' choice to provide reduced procedural protection for discretionary relief.'
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.
