The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against immigrants seeking to challenge administrative decisions in federal court. The case could make the difference between someone staying in the U.S. or being deported, reports Bloomberg Law. In a 5-4 ruling on Monday written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the justices said a law barring courts from considering relief that is left up to the discretion of immigration officials applies to factual disputes as to whether someone is eligible for that discretionary relief.
Justice Neil Gorsuch disagreed with his Republican-appointed colleagues to join more liberal justices in dissent. During arguments in December, a number of justices suggested that the strong presumption for judicial review should favor the petitioner, Pankajkumar Patel, who has lived in the U.S. for nearly 30 years. Immigration officials was barred from seeking a green card by immigration officials because he’d falsely stated that he was a US citizen when applying for a driver’s license. The high court ruling means Patel can’t challenge that determination in court. In his dissent, Gorsuch said, "Today, the Court holds that a federal bureaucracy can make an obvious factual error, one that will result in an individual’s removal from this country, and nothing can be done about it."