Mejia Rodriguez v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that USCIS determination of eligibility of adjustment of status does not implicate agency discretion
• concluding the district judge had jurisdiction under the APA to review the decision of the USCIS Administrative Appeals Office (“AAO”
• explaining that Congress added the “regardless” clause “presumably to resolve a disagreement between some of [the] circuits and district courts as to whether § 1252(a)(2)(B) applied outside the context of removal proceedings”
• “[S]imply because the Secretary has the ultimate discretionary authority to grant an immigration benefit does not mean that every determination made by USCIS regarding an alien’s application for that benefit is discretionary, and hence not subject to review.”
• “The language . . . was added with the passage of the REAL ID Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-13, 119 Stat. 302, presumably to resolve a disagreement between some of our sister circuits and district courts as to whether § 1252(a)(2)(B
• same for nonimmigrant with B-2 visa

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).