## Facts

- The respondent, a native and citizen of Mexico, entered the United States without lawful status and later obtained lawful permanent resident (LPR) status through an approved VAWA self-petition as the battered spouse of an LPR.
- The record contained substantial evidence that her first husband abused her physically and mentally over multiple years; the couple separated in 1996, and she reported no contact after 1998.
- She divorced her first husband in 2004 and remarried in 2006 to a noncitizen spouse; the second marriage was not abusive.
- In 2004, she attempted to enter the United States at Otay Mesa, California, while driving two minor children who were not her own and who lacked lawful status or entry documents.
- DHS charged her as an arriving alien inadmissible for alien smuggling under INA § 212(a)(6)(E)(i).
- She also had a 2003 DUI conviction, treated as an adverse discretionary factor rather than a statutory bar in these proceedings.
- She sought special rule cancellation of removal for battered spouses under INA § 240A(b)(2), asserting family equities including hardship to her U.S. citizen child with hearing-related and educational needs.

## Issues

1. Whether an LPR who qualifies as a battered spouse is statutorily eligible to apply for special rule cancellation of removal under INA § 240A(b)(2), despite the heading of INA § 240A(b) referring to “nonpermanent residents.”
2. Whether, and how, divorce from the abuser, remarriage, and prior VAWA self-petition/LPR status should be considered in the discretionary decision to grant INA § 240A(b)(2) relief.
3. Whether the Immigration Judge adequately weighed adverse factors (including alien-smuggling conduct, DUI history, and compliance evidence) against favorable equities in granting relief.

## Decision

- The Board held that, notwithstanding the heading of INA § 240A(b), an LPR who qualifies as a battered spouse may be eligible to apply for cancellation of removal under INA § 240A(b)(2).
- The Board held that divorce from the abusive spouse, remarriage, and a prior VAWA self-petition based on the abusive marriage are relevant discretionary considerations in adjudicating INA § 240A(b)(2) applications.
- The Board sustained DHS’s appeal and remanded for further proceedings because the Immigration Judge did not sufficiently address and weigh the relevant discretionary factors in light of the purpose and structure of the relief.

## Legal Principles

- Statutory headings may aid interpretation but do not control or narrow the operative statutory text when the text is broader; the INA § 240A(b) heading does not categorically bar LPRs from INA § 240A(b)(2).
- LPR status, by itself, does not preclude statutory eligibility for special rule cancellation of removal under INA § 240A(b)(2) if the applicant otherwise satisfies the provision’s requirements.
- Special rule cancellation under INA § 240A(b)(2) is discretionary; adjudicators must balance favorable equities and adverse considerations on the full record.
- In exercising discretion under INA § 240A(b)(2), relevant considerations include: the applicant’s divorce from the abusive spouse, remarriage and changed circumstances, and prior receipt of VAWA-based immigration benefits tied to the abuse.
- Standard discretionary factors remain relevant, including criminal history, immigration-related misconduct (including alien smuggling), family ties and hardship to qualifying relatives, and evidence bearing on good moral character and compliance (such as tax and employment records).

## Conclusion

The Board recognized that battered spouses who are lawful permanent residents are not automatically excluded from INA § 240A(b)(2) cancellation, but required a remand because the discretionary grant must account for changed family circumstances and prior VAWA-based benefits, along with the seriousness of the alien-smuggling conduct and other adverse factors.


Matter of A-M-, 25 I. & N. Dec. 66 (B.I.A. 2009)