The Board of Immigration Appeals found that retail theft is not a sufficient basis for removal of an immigrant. In their finding the BIA found their 2006 precedent does not comply with the categorical approach from the U.S. Supreme Court. In the Supreme Court’s approach, the focus should be on the elements of the convicted crime, not the conduct of the individual. The three-judge panel terminated removal proceedings against an individual, overturning board precedent on the grounds for removal.
The basis of the original finding of removability was based on the “Matter of Jurado”. The Matter of Jurado is referenced when individuals are facing removal proceedings, particularly if the basis concerns crimes of moral turpitude. Crimes involving moral turpitude generally refer to acts considered inherently dishonest or morally wrong, such as fraud, theft, or violent crimes. These offenses can have significant immigration consequences, including inadmissibility, denial of certain immigration benefits, or deportation. The BIA ruled that retail theft does not qualify as a crime of moral turpitude. As such, it is not the basis for removal proceedings.
If you have questions about removal proceedings or any other U.S. immigration related issue, contact us at ILBSG. Our attorneys work directly with clients. We work closely with our clients, keeping them informed, to ensure they get the right advice for their specific situations.
