The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decided that retail theft isn’t a sufficient basis for removal of an immigrant from the U.S. They concluded that a 2006 rule didn’t match the way the U.S. Supreme Court says we should look at crimes. The Supreme Court believes we should focus on the specific elements of the crime itself, not on what the individual did.

A panel of three judges ended removal proceedings for an individual, overturning the previous rule about what counts as a reason for removal.

Originally, the case was based on a decision called “Matter of Jurado.” This decision is often cited when someone is facing removal, especially if it involves crimes considered morally wrong. These crimes can include fraud, theft, or violence and can lead to serious immigration issues, like being denied entry, losing immigration benefits, or deportation. However, the BIA ruled that retail theft doesn’t fit the definition of a morally wrong crime, so it can’t be used as a reason for removal.

If you have questions about removal proceedings or any other U.S. immigration-related issue, please contact us. Our attorneys work with our clients every step of the way to keep them informed and to maximize the odds of a successful outcome.