Bouarfa v. Mayorkas

On December 10, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled in Bouarfa v. Mayorkas. The plaintiff, Ahmed Bouarfa, a U.S. citizen, petitioned for an immigrant visa for his spouse. After initial approval by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the agency later revoked the petition based on findings of marriage fraud. Bouarfa challenged the revocation, arguing it was arbitrary and capricious. The central legal question was whether federal courts possess jurisdiction to review the discretionary revocation of a visa petition. Citing the Administrative Procedure Act and prior precedent, the appellate panel affirmed the district court's dismissal, holding that the Secretary of Homeland Security's authority to revoke a petition "at any time" is discretionary and thus statutorily barred from judicial review.

The D.C. Circuit Court affirmed the dismissal of the case, holding that the decision to revoke an approved visa petition is a discretionary act committed to agency judgment by law, thereby precluding judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act.

Whether the doctrine of consular nonreviewability and statutory provisions bar federal courts from reviewing the discretionary revocation of a previously approved immigrant visa petition by the Secretary of Homeland Security.

The ruling reinforces the broad discretionary authority of immigration officials in visa adjudications, limiting judicial oversight over family-based immigration petitions. It raises significant concerns among immigration advocates regarding due process and the finality of administrative decisions that impact family unity, effectively insulating certain revocation decisions from federal court scrutiny.