The Supreme Court has recently reinforced the principle of consular non-reviewability regarding visa decisions, marking the second time in a decade that such a stance has been upheld. This decision came as the Court denied relief to a U.S. citizen spouse who contested the denial of a visa for their non-citizen spouse.
In 2015, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in Kerry v. Din, denying relief to Ms. Din, a U.S. citizen whose Pakistani husband’s immigrant visa was denied. Ms. Din argued that she should have the right to review the basis of her husband’s visa denial by the Department of State, asserting a violation of due process. Although the narrow victory left open the possibility of future challenges under different circumstances, hopes for such revisions were recently dashed.
Last week, in a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that a U.S. citizen spouse does not possess a fundamental liberty interest in their non-citizen spouse’s admission to the United States. The case involved Sandra Munoz, who married her Salvadoran husband in 2010 and sought to challenge his visa denial by a consular officer in San Salvador. Despite her argument that the denial infringed on her constitutional right to live with her husband in the U.S., the Court upheld the doctrine of non-reviewability, emphasizing that no constitutional right exists for a U.S. citizen to reside with a non-citizen spouse in the country.
While the Munoz case centered on spousal immigration, it did not extend to broader issues beyond immigrant visas. Nevertheless, the decision reinforces consular officers’ authority to deny both immigrant and nonimmigrant visas under the Immigration and Nationality Act without external review, except in exceptional cases where constitutional rights of U.S. citizens are allegedly violated.
This decision underscores the critical role of consular officers in visa adjudication and highlights the importance for individuals and businesses to understand potential visa obstacles before their visa interviews.