U.S. citizens don’t have a constitutional right to bring their noncitizen spouses into the U.S., the Supreme Court has ruled.

The court, in a 6-3 ruling on Friday, reaffirmed Congress’ broad power to set immigration limits and the Executive Branch’s role in carrying out those orders in deciding who can come.

The justices had previously ruled that a would-be migrant lacks the constitutional right to challenge those decisions, and it now ruled that U.S. citizens don’t have the right, either.

---

---

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the majority, said “we hold that a citizen does not have a fundamental liberty interest in her noncitizen spouse being admitted to the country.”

The case was brought by Sandra Munoz, a U.S. citizen who argued she had a right to sue to get her husband, Luis Ascencio-Cordero, a citizen of El Salvador, into the U.S.

The state department denied him a visa because it suspected he had ties to the violent gang Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13, based on four of his body tattoos.

Would-be migrants don’t generally have a right to challenge their denials, but Ms. Munoz argued she had a right because the decision was hindering her own marriage rights. She said that right is at least strong enough to earn the chance to argue her husband isn’t a member of MS-13.

Analysts said thousands of similar cases exist, and their fate was riding on the outcome of Ms. Munoz’s argument.

The State Department last year approved 11 million visas and denied 62,000 applications. Among them were 5,400 people seeking to unite with a U.S. citizen partner.

The case presented rare common ground between the Biden administration and people who favor a stiffer approach to immigration enforcement.

They pointed out that U.S. citizens don’t have the right to argue in court that they have a marriage interest in blocking a spouse’s deportation. They said it would not make sense to create more rights in the case of someone outside the U.S. altogether.