This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 04/30/2024 "On December 19, 2016, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published an interim final rule (2016 interim rule...
Bouarfa v. Mayorkas Issue: Whether a visa petitioner may obtain judicial review when an approved petition is revoked on the basis of nondiscretionary criteria. Case below: 75 F.4th 1157 (11th Cir....
IMMpact Litigation, Apr. 25, 2024 "IMMpact Litigation, seeking redress for over 100,000 Ukrainian nationals paroled into the United States post-February 2022, today announces a significant advancement...
DOL, Apr. 26, 2024 "The Department of Labor today announced a final rule to strengthen protections for farmworkers . The rule targets vulnerability and abuses experienced by workers under the H...
NILA, Apr. 24, 2024 "The National Immigration Litigation Alliance (NILA) and Innovation Law Lab are thrilled to announce that, in response to the lawsuit we filed against the United States Citizenship...
Matter of Al Sabsabi, 28 I&N Dec. 269 (BIA 2021)
(1) The “offense clause” of the Federal conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. § 371 (2012), is divisible and the underlying substantive crime is an element of the offense.
(2) Because the substantive offense underlying the respondent’s Federal conspiracy conviction—namely, selling counterfeit currency in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 473 (2012)—is a crime involving moral turpitude, his conviction for conspiring to commit this offense is likewise one for a crime involving moral turpitude.
"The Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) appeals from the Immigration Judge’s March 6, 2018, decision concluding that the respondent’s conviction for conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 371 (2012) is not one for a crime involving moral turpitude and terminating the removal proceedings against the respondent. We conclude that the Immigration Judge erred by applying the categorical approach to only the conspiracy statute without considering the turpitudinous nature of the underlying offense the respondent conspired to commit. Upon our de novo review, we conclude that the respondent was convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude and that he is removable. Accordingly, the DHS’s appeal will be sustained, the Immigration Judge’s order terminating proceedings will be vacated, and the record will be remanded to the Immigration Judge for further proceedings."