Raquel Hinojosa, et al. v. Petra Horn, et al.

Petitioners were born, and their births were timely registered, in Brownsville, Texas. Ms. Hinojosa, who had been residing in Mexico, applied for, and was denied, a United States passport. By contrast, Ms. Villafranca, who was residing with her family in Texas, had a U.S. passport, but the State Department revoked it. When she sought re-entry the following day, her passport was confiscated, and she was returned to Mexico. Both women are now stranded in Mexico. They sought judicial review of the denial/revocation of their passports, under the Administrative Procedure Act, as authorized by Rusk v. Cort, 369 U.S. 367, 375-379 (1962).1 The district court dismissed their actions for lack of jurisdiction, holding that they were required to exhaust the procedures of 8 U.S.C. §§1503(b)-(c). Over a strong dissent, the Fifth Circuit affirmed. Hinojosa et al. v. Horn et al., 896 F.3d 305 (5th Cir. 2018). The questions presented are therefore as follows: • Whether 8 U.S.C. §§1503(b)-(c) preempts judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act of the denial or revocation of a passport for a United States citizenship claimant abroad, notwithstanding that this construction was explicitly rejected by Rusk v. Cort, 369 U.S. at 379. 1 Abrogated by Califano v. Sanders, 430 U.S. 99 (1977), on the grounds that the Administrative Procedure Act does not provide jurisdiction.