Pankajkumar Patel and his wife sought discretionary adjustment of immigration status after Patel had falsely stated on a Georgia driver’s-license application that he was a United States citizen. The agency denied adjustment, and the Eleventh Circuit held that the federal courts could not review the agency’s factual determinations under the immigration statute. The Supreme Court reversed that judgment and resolved a circuit conflict over the scope of the jurisdiction-stripping provision. It held that the statutory bar covers judgments relating to the granting of discretionary relief, including factual findings made in deciding an adjustment application. Because the agency’s decision fell within that category, judicial review was unavailable. Justice Gorsuch dissented, arguing that the Court’s reading left serious agency errors insulated from judicial review.