Safadi v. Howard

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that where a statute does not impose limits on discretionary authority, the entire adjudication process is precluded from judicial review under§ 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii)
• concluding that any distinction between the USCIS’s decision and its decision- making process is “untenable” and that federal courts lack jurisdiction to review the USCIS’s discretionary pace of adjudication
• concluding that any distinction between the USCIS’s decision and its decision- making process is “untenable” and that federal courts lack jurisdiction to review the USCIS’s discretionary pace of adjudication
• concluding that any distinction between the USCIS’s decision and its decision- making process is “untenable” and that federal courts lack jurisdiction to review the USCIS’s discretionary pace of adjudication
• finding that citations to Mandamus Act and APA could not establish 3 Section 1252(a)(2)(B
• finding that citations to Mandamus Act and APA could not establish subject matter jurisdiction because USCIS does not owe a “clear nondiscretionary duty” to process an adjustment of status application “at any particular pace or speed”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).