The Ninth Circuit has affirmed the dismissal, for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, of a challenge brought by a long-term Northern Mariana Islands resident to USCIS's denial of his application for NM-1 status, a special immigration status created for CNMI residents left without lawful status after federal immigration law was extended to the territory. The petitioner argued that the statute's jurisdiction-stripping provision, which bars review of "any decision of the Secretary of Homeland Security" on an NM-1 application, applies only to decisions made by the Secretary personally, not to USCIS acting under delegated authority.
The Court rejected that argument, holding that because the petitioner conceded the Secretary validly delegated his NM-1 adjudicatory authority to USCIS, a decision by USCIS is functionally a decision of the Secretary for purposes of both the statute's grant of adjudicatory authority and its bar on judicial review. The Court found this reading reinforced by the Supreme Court's and every other circuit's consistent, if largely unstated, assumption that similarly worded jurisdiction-stripping provisions naming only an agency head extend to decisions made by that official's delegates, and held that because the statutory text was unambiguous, the general presumption favoring judicial review of agency action did not apply.
The full text of Barman v. United States can be found here: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2026/09/14/24-464.pdf