## Facts

- Ludimilla Ramos Da Silva, a citizen of Brazil, entered the United States as a child on a B-2 visa in 1994, overstayed, and never departed.
- She married a U.S. citizen in 2012; during the marriage, the spouse subjected her to emotional, psychological, and physical abuse and used her undocumented status to control her.
- Da Silva had prior trauma and was diagnosed with PTSD.
- After discovering sexually explicit messages between her spouse and his coworker, Da Silva confronted the coworker twice in one day and struck her during each confrontation.
- Da Silva pleaded guilty to two counts of assault by striking, beating, or wounding under 18 U.S.C. § 113(a)(4) and received an 18-month custodial sentence.
- In removal proceedings based on overstay, Da Silva sought VAWA “battered spouse” cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(2).
- The Immigration Judge found she had been abused and that removal would cause extreme hardship, but denied relief, holding she lacked good moral character due to confinement exceeding 180 days and that the VAWA exception did not apply.
- The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether the phrase “connected to” in the VAWA good-moral-character exception is ambiguous and, if not, what it means.
2. Whether Da Silva’s assault convictions were “connected to” her having been battered or subjected to extreme cruelty, so that her imprisonment did not bar a finding of good moral character for VAWA cancellation.

## Decision

- The Third Circuit granted the petition for review, vacated the agency’s order, and remanded.
- The court held “connected to” is unambiguous and means having a causal or logical relationship.
- Applying that standard, the court held Da Silva’s assault convictions were connected to the extreme cruelty inflicted by her spouse, so the agency erred in treating her confinement as an automatic bar to good moral character under VAWA.

## Legal Principles

- For VAWA battered-spouse cancellation, the “connected to” exception to good-moral-character bars applies when the act or conviction has a causal or logical relationship to the applicant’s having been battered or subjected to extreme cruelty.
- Because “connected to” is unambiguous, an agency interpretation that imposes a narrower nexus is not entitled to deference.
- Conduct may qualify as “connected to” the abuse even when the criminal act is directed at a third party, if it arises from and is intertwined with the abusive relationship.

## Conclusion

The court vacated the denial of VAWA cancellation because the agency applied an overly narrow reading of “connected to”; Da Silva’s assault convictions, arising from the abusive marital dynamic, fell within the statutory exception to the confinement-based good-moral-character bar.


Ramos Da Silva v. Att’y Gen. U.S., 948 F.3d 629 (3d Cir. 2020)