Bouarfa v. Mayorkas
Case Overview
Bouarfa v. Mayorkas (2024) held 9-0 that decisions by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to deny visa petitions on the basis of statutory bars to admissibility — here, a finding that a marriage was fraudulent — are 'committed to agency discretion by law' under 5 U.S.C. § 701(a)(2) and thus unreviewable in federal court. The decision closed a significant judicial-review avenue for spouses of U.S. citizens whose visa petitions are denied on fraud grounds.
Decision
Opinion of the Court
The Facts
Olympia Bouarfa, a U.S. citizen, petitioned for an immigrant visa for her husband Ala'a Hamdan, a Jordanian national. USCIS granted the petition, but later revoked it after concluding the prior marriage that gave Hamdan his first green card was fraudulent — triggering a statutory bar under 8 U.S.C. § 1154(c). Bouarfa challenged the revocation in federal court. The Eleventh Circuit dismissed the challenge, holding the decision was committed to agency discretion. The Supreme Court granted cert to resolve a circuit split.
The Application
Under § 1155's grant of broad discretionary authority to revoke approved petitions 'for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause,' USCIS's determination to revoke Hamdan's petition fell squarely within § 701(a)(2)'s bar on judicial review of such discretionary decisions. The Court treated USCIS's finding that Hamdan's prior marriage was fraudulent—the basis for invoking the statutory bar under § 1154(c)—as an inseparable part of the agency's discretionary revocation decision, rejecting any attempt to carve out the underlying factual finding for independent review. As a result, Bouarfa had no federal court recourse, despite USCIS's contested fraud determination permanently barring Hamdan from receiving any immigration benefits through her as a U.S. citizen.
The Conclusion
**Unanimous 2024 ruling foreclosing judicial review of visa petition revocations on fraud grounds.** The decision effectively insulates USCIS determinations of marriage fraud — which permanently bar a foreign national from receiving any immigration benefit through that U.S. citizen spouse — from Article III review, even when the finding is contested.
No circuit court data for this case.
Flag an issue
This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support