Justice Jackson Authors First Decision of OT2024

The junior justice authors a unanimous immigration law decision for the first of the term.

This morning the Supreme Court issued its first signed decision in an argued case for October Term 2024. (The Court previously DIGged another case.) This restores the tradition of deciding at least some cases in the fall. Last year, the Court's first decision in an argued case did not appear until January.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote for a unanimous Court in Bouarfa v. Mayorkas, which considered whether a petitioner may obtain judicial review when an approved visa petition is revoked due to a determination by the government that the petitioner  was in a sham marriage.

Here is how Justice Jackson summarizes the decision:

A common feature of our Nation's complex system of lawful immigration is mandatory statutory rules paired with discretionary exceptions. Executive Branch agencies implement both. Whether any given agency decision is mandatory or discretionary matters, because Congress has limited judicial review of many discretionary determinations. See 66 Stat. 208, as amended, 8 U. S. C. §1252(a)(2)(B). This case involves the Secretary of Homeland Security's decision to revoke initial approval of a visa petition that Amina Bouarfa, a U. S. citizen, filed on behalf of her noncitizen spouse

The Secretary points to 8 U. S. C. §1155 as the source of the agency's revocation authority; that provision states that the Secretary "may, at any time," revoke approval of a visa petition "for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause." The issue we address today is whether revocation under §1155 qualifies as a decision "in the discretion of " the Secretary such that it falls within the purview of a separate statute—§1252(a)(2)(B)(ii)—that strips federal courts of jurisdiction to review certain discretionary actions. We hold that it does.

It is not surprising that the first opinion of the term is unanimous, as unanimity can produce a smoother and quicker opinion drafting process. It is also worth remembering that, as the junior-most justice, Justice Jackson is most likely to be assigned unanimous decisions in cases that the justices believe present straight-forward and relatively easily resolved questions.

There is no word yet on when the Court may issue additional opinions.