Immigration · Primary-source case analysis

Bouarfa: Discretionary Visa-Petition Revocation Is Not Judicially Reviewable

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published May 6, 2026 · Updated October 17, 2026

Decision: Bouarfa v. Mayorkas, 604 U.S. 6 (2024).

Bouarfa v. Mayorkas addresses whether a federal court may review USCIS’s decision to revoke an already approved family-based visa petition for good and sufficient cause.

USCIS approved and later revoked the petition

U.S. citizen Amina Bouarfa filed a petition for her husband. USCIS initially approved it, then revoked approval after concluding that the husband had previously entered a marriage to evade immigration law.

The revocation statute grants discretion

Section 1155 authorizes the Secretary to revoke approval at any time for good and sufficient cause. The Court read that language as conferring discretionary authority of the kind covered by section 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii)’s judicial-review bar.

The stated reason did not make revocation reviewable

Bouarfa argued that the underlying sham-marriage determination was nondiscretionary. The Court unanimously held that judicial review still turns on the challenged agency action—the discretionary revocation—not on whether one component reason resembles a nondiscretionary eligibility rule.

Other procedural routes remain distinct

The decision did not hold that every agency action involving marriage fraud is insulated from review. A denial of an initial petition, a new petition and other statutory procedures present different questions. The Court expressly left open whether constitutional or procedural-violation allegations in a revocation challenge would be reviewable. The Court affirmed dismissal of this challenge to revocation.

Key takeaways

• Identify whether the challenged action is a denial or a revocation.
• Read the specific statute assigning the agency’s authority.
• Do not assume a nondiscretionary reason makes the ultimate revocation reviewable.
• Evaluate alternative petitions and procedural remedies separately.