Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

jurisdictionattorneyvisanaturalizationjudicial review
jurisdictionattorneyvisanaturalizationjudicial review

Related Cases

Piledrivers Local Union
View Case »
Mejia v. Whitaker
View Case »
Ateka v. Ashcroft
View Case »
Lucaj v. Dedvukaj
View Case »
Duran v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

El-Khader v. Monica

Facts

Hani El-Khader, a citizen of Jordan, entered the U.S. on a non-immigrant student visa and later attempted to remain in the U.S. after his visa expired. He married a U.S. citizen, but the marriage was deemed a 'sham' by the INS due to lack of cohabitation and consummation. The INS revoked his visa petition, leading to a district court ruling that it lacked jurisdiction to review the INS's decision.

Hani El-Khader, a citizen of Jordan, entered the U.S. on a non-immigrant student visa and later attempted to remain in the U.S. after his visa expired. He married a U.S. citizen, but the marriage was deemed a 'sham' by the INS due to lack of cohabitation and consummation.

Issue

Whether the district court had subject matter jurisdiction to review the INS's decision to revoke El-Khader's visa petition.

Whether the district court had subject matter jurisdiction to review the INS's decision to revoke El-Khader's visa petition.

Rule

8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) precludes judicial review of any discretionary decision made by the Attorney General, including the revocation of a visa petition under 8 U.S.C. 1155.

8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) precludes judicial review of any discretionary decision made by the Attorney General, including the revocation of a visa petition under 8 U.S.C. 1155.

Analysis

The court determined that the INS's decision to revoke El-Khader's visa petition was discretionary and thus fell under the jurisdictional bar of 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii). The court referenced its prior decision in Samirah v. O'Connell, which established that this provision applies beyond removal proceedings and encompasses discretionary decisions regarding visa petitions.

The court determined that the INS's decision to revoke El-Khader's visa petition was discretionary and thus fell under the jurisdictional bar of 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii).

Conclusion

The court affirmed the district court's ruling, concluding that it lacked jurisdiction to review the INS's discretionary decision to revoke El-Khader's visa petition.

The court affirmed the district court's ruling, concluding that it lacked jurisdiction to review the INS's discretionary decision to revoke El-Khader's visa petition.

Who won?

The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) prevailed because the court upheld the dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, affirming that the decision to revoke the visa was discretionary and not subject to judicial review.

The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) prevailed because the court upheld the dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.

You must be