103 F.4th 1271
7th Cir.2024Background
- Umeshkumar Soni, a Canadian citizen, has been unlawfully present in the U.S. for over a year and seeks an immigrant visa.
- Under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(B)(i)(II), he must first leave the U.S. and wait abroad for ten years unless a waiver is granted.
- Only aliens with certain relatives in the U.S. may apply for a pre-departure waiver based on extreme hardship (8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(B)(v)).
- Soni applied for such a waiver (Form I-601A) and, after 17 months without a decision, filed suit to compel action within 14 days.
- The district court dismissed his case for lack of jurisdiction, citing the statute’s bar on judicial review of waiver decisions or actions.
- Soni appealed the dismissal to the Seventh Circuit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether courts have jurisdiction to compel agency | Delay is not a “decision”; court can order action on pending waiver | Statute bars review of any agency "decision or action" on waivers | No jurisdiction; statute bars review |
| Applicability of APA judicial review | APA generally permits review of agency inaction | APA exception for statutes that preclude review applies here | APA does not apply |
| Statute's scope on timing/prioritization | Did not directly address | Agency's prioritization and staffing are "actions regarding" | Judicial branch cannot intervene |
| Comparison to other courts/intervention precedent | Sought district court intervention | No appellate authority authorizes ordering agency timeline | No precedent for such orders |
Key Cases Cited
- Patel v. Garland, 596 U.S. 328 (2022) (statute’s bar on judicial review is broad and includes discretionary decisions)
- Wilkinson v. Garland, 601 U.S. 209 (2024) (statute lacking special proviso does not allow judicial review of legal matters)