## Facts

- Jose Jesus Avila–Anguiano, a Mexican national, later became a lawful permanent resident through an immigrant visa obtained as the spouse of a U.S. citizen.
- In 1991, at the border, he falsely claimed to be a U.S. citizen and pled guilty to making a false claim of citizenship under 8 U.S.C. § 1325, then returned to Mexico.
- In 1993, he applied for an immigrant visa based on marriage to a U.S. citizen but did not disclose the 1991 conviction; the government granted the visa and admitted him.
- The government later initiated removal proceedings under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(A), alleging he was inadmissible at admission due to fraud or willful misrepresentation of a material fact under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i).
- The parties agreed that both the 1991 false citizenship claim and the 1993 omission fell within § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i) and supported removability under § 1227(a)(1)(A).
- Avila–Anguiano sought relief under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(H), which allows the Attorney General, in discretion, to waive removal based on inadmissibility at admission for aliens described in § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i).

## Issues

1. Whether 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(H) permits the Attorney General to waive only the visa-related misrepresentation (the 1993 omission) or also an earlier, separate misrepresentation (the 1991 false claim) that contributed to inadmissibility at admission under § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i).
2. Whether the Board of Immigration Appeals correctly concluded that the Attorney General lacked authority to waive removability to the extent it rested on the 1991 misrepresentation.

## Decision

- The Sixth Circuit vacated the BIA’s decision.
- The court held that § 1227(a)(1)(H) authorizes the Attorney General, in discretion, to waive removability under § 1227(a)(1)(A) to the extent it is based on inadmissibility under § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i) resulting from both the 1991 and 1993 misrepresentations.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with that interpretation, leaving the ultimate discretionary decision to the agency.

## Legal Principles

- Section 1227(a)(1)(H) waives “the removal of aliens . . . on the ground” that they were inadmissible at admission as aliens described in § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i); it targets the removal ground, not a single identified act of fraud.
- When multiple misrepresentations collectively make an alien “described in” § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i) and thus removable under § 1227(a)(1)(A), the waiver may reach removability arising from all such misrepresentations.
- A restrictive agency reading limiting the waiver to one misrepresentation tied to the visa process is inconsistent with the statute’s focus on the ground of removal based on § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i).
- Where statutory text is clear on the scope of the waiver, the court need not accept an agency interpretation that narrows it beyond the text.

## Conclusion

The Sixth Circuit held that the fraud waiver in 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(H) can extend to removability under § 1227(a)(1)(A) based on the full § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i) inadmissibility ground, allowing discretionary waiver of both an earlier false citizenship claim and a later visa-application omission that together supported the charge.


Avila-Anguiano v. Holder, 2012 WL 3181618 (6th Cir. 2012)