Revoked I-140s after Bouarfa v. Mayorkas: what courts will no longer review

An approved I-140 can be taken back. When USCIS revokes approval under its discretionary power, a unanimous Supreme Court has said that federal courts cannot review that decision. For employers, the notice of intent to revoke has become the only real forum.

What the Court decided

In Bouarfa v. Mayorkas, decided 10 December 2024, the Court held that revocation of an approved visa petition under 8 U.S.C. § 1155 is a discretionary decision covered by the jurisdiction-stripping provision in section 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii). The statute lets the Secretary revoke approval "at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause". The case concerned a family petition, but section 1155 is the same power used to revoke employment-based petitions.

The consequence is direct. Where USCIS revokes an I-140 approval in the exercise of that discretion, a district court suit asking a judge to reconsider the revocation will generally fail at the threshold. The legal map is set out on Mandamus.com's page on the INA § 242 discretionary bar.

What Bouarfa did not decide

It did not make every immigration decision unreviewable, and it did not reach claims that USCIS has failed to act. In a June 2026 EB-5 delay case, a district judge distinguished Bouarfa because the processing provision there used a single word of discretion, not three; that reasoning is covered in the RIA processing goal in court and in the 2026 jurisdiction fight. A delay claim over a pending I-140, such as the I-140 mandamus actions employers bring, rests on a different footing from a challenge to a revocation.

Automatic revocation is also a separate track. Under 8 C.F.R. § 205.1, certain events revoke approval by operation of the rule, including an employer's withdrawal filed less than 180 days after approval, unless an associated I-485 has been pending 180 days or more. Timing a withdrawal correctly preserves more than litigation can, a point already made in moving an approved I-140.

What employers should change

• Treat a notice of intent to revoke as the final hearing. Answer every ground with documents, within the deadline, and assume no court will look again.
• Keep the evidence that supports approval current after approval: ability to pay, the job as certified, the beneficiary's qualifications. Revocation grounds often surface years later.
• Sequence withdrawals against the 180-day line and against any pending adjustment.
• Do not plan on a lawsuit as the backstop for a revocation, and do not confuse it with a delay suit. The difference is the theme of APA delay versus mandamus and of when not to litigate.

Questions

Does Bouarfa apply to I-140 revocations?

Its reasoning concerns section 1155, which is the power used to revoke approved immigrant petitions generally, including employment-based ones. Specific cases still need counsel.

Can a company still sue over a slow I-140?

Delay claims are a different question from revocation. Courts continue to hear them, subject to the jurisdiction arguments described above.

Is withdrawal after 180 days safe?

Under 8 C.F.R. § 205.1 a withdrawal filed 180 days or more after approval does not trigger automatic revocation, but it changes what the petition can support. Sequence it with counsel.

General information, not legal advice. Rules and processing practice change; verify against the agency's own published figures and take advice on your own facts.