Ninth Circuit rules on immigration status appeal case

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled on a significant immigration case, affirming the dismissal of Sukesh Barman's appeal regarding his application for special immigration status. The court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to review the decision made by United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to deny Barman's application for NM-1 status. This ruling affects individuals seeking similar immigration relief in the Northern Mariana Islands.

The case, Barman v. USA, was filed under docket number 24-464 and was presided over by Judges N. Randy Smith, Eric D. Miller, and Anthony D. Johnstone. The ruling was filed on September 14, 2026, after oral arguments were presented in June of the same year.

Background

Sukesh Barman, the plaintiff and appellant in this case, applied for NM-1 immigration status, which is designed for long-term residents of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. This special status was created by the Northern Mariana Islands Long-Term Legal Residents Relief Act, enacted in 2019. The Act allows certain individuals to live and work in the Northern Mariana Islands, but it also includes provisions that limit judicial review of decisions made regarding these applications.

Barman's application was denied by the USCIS Guam Field Office because he did not meet the residency requirements outlined in the Relief Act. Following the denial, Barman sought administrative reconsideration, which was also denied. He then filed a lawsuit in federal district court, asking for a declaration that he met the eligibility criteria for NM-1 status and requesting a mandatory injunction to compel USCIS to approve his application.

The government responded by moving to dismiss the case, arguing that the jurisdiction-stripping provision in the Relief Act barred any court from reviewing the denial of Barman's application. The district court agreed with the government's position and dismissed the case, leading Barman to appeal the decision to the Ninth Circuit.

The Ruling

The Ninth Circuit upheld the district court's dismissal, stating that 48 U.S.C. § 1806(e)(6)(D) indeed bars judicial review of decisions made by USCIS regarding NM-1 status applications. Judge Eric D. Miller, writing for the panel, noted, "If, as Barman conceded, a decision by USCIS is a decision of the Secretary for purposes of the provision that confers authority on the Secretary to adjudicate NM-1 applications, then it follows that a decision by USCIS must also be a decision of the Secretary for purposes of the judicial review provision."

The court emphasized that the Relief Act's jurisdiction-stripping provision clearly states that no court shall have jurisdiction to review decisions made by the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General regarding NM-1 applications. The judges highlighted that the Secretary had previously delegated the authority to adjudicate these applications to USCIS, which means that decisions made by USCIS are effectively decisions made by the Secretary.

The ruling further clarified that the legal context surrounding the Relief Act supports the conclusion that Congress intended to bar judicial review of decisions made by USCIS. The court referenced similar jurisdiction-stripping provisions in federal immigration law, noting that other courts have consistently applied these provisions to deny judicial review of USCIS decisions.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for individuals seeking NM-1 status or similar immigration relief in the Northern Mariana Islands. By affirming the dismissal of Barman's case, the Ninth Circuit has reinforced the idea that certain immigration decisions made by USCIS are not subject to judicial review. This means that individuals in similar situations may find it challenging to contest denials of their applications in court.

The decision also serves as a reminder of the limitations placed on judicial review in immigration matters, particularly in cases involving discretionary decisions made by immigration authorities. This ruling could impact future cases involving applications for NM-1 status or other immigration benefits, as it establishes a precedent that courts may not have the authority to intervene in these decisions.

What's Next

Barman's case may not be the end of the road for him, as he could potentially seek further legal options outside of the Ninth Circuit. However, the ruling does not indicate any pending related cases that could affect the outcome of similar appeals. The decision stands as a clear interpretation of the jurisdictional limits imposed by the Relief Act.