## Facts

- Moones Mellouli, a Tunisian national and lawful permanent resident, was arrested in Kansas after officers found pills in his sock.
- He pleaded guilty to a Kansas misdemeanor for possessing drug paraphernalia, identified as the sock used to conceal the pills.
- The Kansas paraphernalia statute covered items used to store or conceal a “controlled substance,” with “controlled substance” defined by Kansas schedules that included substances not listed in the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
- The record of conviction did not identify the pills as a particular drug and did not specify a substance listed in the federal CSA schedules.
- The Department of Homeland Security charged Mellouli as removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i) based on the paraphernalia conviction.
- An Immigration Judge ordered removal; the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed, concluding a paraphernalia conviction need not be tied to a federally scheduled substance.
- The Eighth Circuit denied review, accepting the agency’s reading of the statute.

## Issues

1. Whether a state conviction for drug paraphernalia under a statute that reaches substances not federally scheduled triggers removability under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i).
2. Whether § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i)’s reference to “a controlled substance (as defined in section 802 of Title 21)” requires a categorical match between the conviction and a federally controlled substance.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the Eighth Circuit in a 7–2 decision.
- The Court held that § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i) requires a connection between an element of the conviction and a substance defined as controlled under 21 U.S.C. § 802.
- Because the Kansas paraphernalia statute encompassed substances beyond the federal schedules and the conviction record did not identify a federally controlled substance, Mellouli’s conviction did not support removability.
- The Court rejected the government’s argument that the phrase “relating to” permits removal based on any state drug-paraphernalia conviction despite the statutory cross-reference to the federal definition.

## Legal Principles

- Under the categorical approach, a conviction supports removal only if the offense’s elements necessarily fall within the federally defined category of removable offenses.
- For § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i), the parenthetical cross-reference to 21 U.S.C. § 802 limits removability to convictions that necessarily involve a federally controlled substance.
- Broad statutory language such as “relating to” cannot be read to nullify an express federal definitional limitation.
- When a state statute criminalizes conduct involving substances outside the federal schedules, a conviction under that statute is not a categorical match to the federal controlled-substance removal ground.

## Conclusion

The Court held that a state drug-paraphernalia conviction cannot trigger removal under § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i) unless the conviction itself necessarily involves a substance listed in the federal controlled-substance schedules.


Mellouli v. Lynch, 575 U.S. 798 (2015)