Supreme Court Rules Against Visa Revocations Review

This week, the Supreme Court issued a ruling that could have some implications for Donald Trump’s aggressive deportation plans.

The court rules against judges being allowed to review visa revocations in sham marriages for immigration purposes.

The court ruled that the responsibility for this review lies only with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

No Reviews

The decision by the court was unanimous, stating that while immigration courts can review initial visa denials, once it has been established that DHS has denied the visa or revoked the visa, the courts are out of it.

The majority opinion was written by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who, in part, wrote, “Congress did not impose specific criteria or conditions limiting this authority, nor did it prescribe how or when the Secretary must act.

“Context reinforces the discretionary nature of §1155.

“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 case, Bouarfa v. Mayorkas. Amina Bourfa, a legal citizen of the United States, is married to a man who had previously had a sham marriage for the sake of residency.

If you are found to have done that, you are permanently banned from the United States.

Justice Roberts noted that the husband could reapply and fight the denial through judicial review, but the Bouarfa’s attorney said that going through that process would create hardships and delays for the families.

Well, you know how you don’t have that problem… you come here legally in the first place and don’t have a sham marriage.

Immigration advocates are now upset because the ruling could add to the already overwhelming load facing immigration courts.

As of this report, there are reportedly more than three million cases on backload with the immigration courts.