Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing plaintiff-alien’s action under Immigration and Nationality Act, Administrative Procedure Act and Religious Freedom Restoration Act that challenged defendant’s decision that found that plaintiff was inadmissible on B-1/B-2 visa under 8 USC section 1182(a)(7), where plaintiff entered U.S. for purposes of speaking at churches and youth groups, performing missionary work and meeting with his academic advisors at plaintiff’s U.S. university. Section 1252(a)(2)(A bars judicial review of any order of removal pursuant to instant expedited removal procedure set forth in 8 USC section 1225(b)(1)(A)(i), and instant lawsuit was challenge to defendant’s determination that plaintiff was removable for lack of proper visa that fit definition of “order of removal” for purposes of section 1225(b)(1)(A)(i). Fact that plaintiff eventually withdrew his application for admission to U.S. and voluntarily left U.S. did not require different result.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Immigration