## Facts

- A 25-year-old Canadian citizen living in Windsor, Ontario sought advance permission to enter the United States temporarily as a nonimmigrant visitor to visit close relatives in Detroit, including her U.S.-citizen mother.
- She had been deported in April 1975 after engaging in prostitution, making her inadmissible under the prostitution-related ground of inadmissibility.
- Aside from the prostitution-related conduct, she had no other criminal history or immigration law violations.
- After deportation, she returned to Canada, lived with her parents, and by September 1976 was steadily employed at two jobs, working long hours, which was offered as evidence of rehabilitation.
- The INS District Director in Detroit denied the application, concluding insufficient time had passed to demonstrate rehabilitation and that she lacked “compelling humanitarian” reasons for entry.
- She appealed the denial to the Board of Immigration Appeals.

## Issues

1. Whether an applicant for advance permission to enter as a nonimmigrant under INA § 212(d)(3)(B) must show “compelling” reasons for entry.
2. What standard governs discretionary adjudication of a § 212(d)(3)(B) waiver application.

## Decision

- The BIA sustained the appeal and granted the § 212(d)(3)(B) waiver for temporary admission.
- The BIA rejected any requirement that the applicant’s reasons for entry be “compelling.”
- The BIA held the waiver requires weighing at least three factors: (1) risk of harm to society, (2) seriousness of the prior immigration or criminal violation, and (3) the nature of the applicant’s reasons for seeking entry.
- Applying the factors, the BIA found low risk of harm, credited evidence of rehabilitation, treated the prior prostitution-based deportation as serious but limited, and found the family-visit purpose substantial.

## Legal Principles

- INA § 212(d)(3)(B) does not impose a threshold requirement that the applicant’s reasons for entry be “compelling.”
- § 212(d)(3)(B) waivers are discretionary and are decided by balancing at least: (1) risk of harm to society if admitted, (2) seriousness of the applicant’s past immigration or criminal violation, and (3) the nature of the reasons for seeking entry.
- Evidence of rehabilitation and the limited scope of past misconduct may reduce the weight of an inadmissibility ground in the discretionary balance.
- Temporary admission of otherwise inadmissible nonimmigrants may be appropriate for humane reasons or reasons of public interest.

## Conclusion

The BIA granted a nonimmigrant waiver under INA § 212(d)(3)(B), holding that adjudicators must apply a three-factor discretionary balancing test and may not demand “compelling” reasons for entry as a prerequisite to relief.


In re Hranka, 16 I. & N. Dec. 491 (B.I.A. 1978)