## Facts

- Charangeet Singh-Kaur, a Sikh and citizen of India, entered the United States without inspection in 1989 and was placed in deportation proceedings.
- He sought asylum, claiming he would be arrested and persecuted if returned to India, and asserted involvement with militant Sikh groups, including Babbar Khalsa and a Bhindranwale-associated militant group.
- Singh admitted attending planning meetings and assisting militants, including providing shelter and helping with weapons movement through villages.
- He also testified that he provided food and helped set up tents used as shelter for members of militant groups at gatherings he described as religious.
- An Immigration Judge granted adjustment of status, but the government appealed.
- The Board of Immigration Appeals reversed, concluding Singh was inadmissible for engaging in “terrorist activity” by providing “material support” to persons involved in terrorism under INA § 212(a)(3)(B)(iv)(VI), and ordered him deported.
- Singh petitioned for review in the Third Circuit.

## Issues

1. Whether providing food and setting up shelter (tents) for members of militant groups constitutes “material support” under INA § 212(a)(3)(B)(iv)(VI).
2. Whether the statute permits a narrow interpretation that would exclude basic humanitarian or religiously framed assistance from “material support.”
3. Whether the BIA’s interpretation of “material support” warrants judicial deference on petition for review.

## Decision

- The Third Circuit denied the petition for review and left the BIA’s deportation order in place.
- The court held that providing food and setting up shelter for persons engaged in terrorist activity qualifies as “material support” within INA § 212(a)(3)(B)(iv)(VI).
- The court accepted the BIA’s determination that Singh knew, or reasonably should have known, that the recipients were connected to terrorism given his admissions and associations.
- The court rejected the argument that the religious or humanitarian character of the events categorically removes such aid from the statute’s reach.
- The court concluded that direct participation in violent acts is not required; logistical and sustenance assistance can suffice.

## Legal Principles

- “Material support” under INA § 212(a)(3)(B) is interpreted broadly and is not limited to money, weapons, or direct operational participation.
- Providing basic necessities and logistical assistance (including food and shelter) can constitute “material support” when furnished to persons the actor knows or reasonably should know are engaged in terrorist activity or affiliated with terrorist organizations.
- The INA’s terrorism-related inadmissibility provisions extend to supporters as well as perpetrators; indirect support that facilitates terrorist actors’ functioning may trigger the bar.
- Courts may defer to the BIA’s reasonable construction of terrorism-related inadmissibility provisions when consistent with statutory text and purpose.

## Conclusion

The Third Circuit affirmed the BIA’s conclusion that Singh-Kaur was inadmissible and subject to deportation because his provision of food and shelter to militant Sikhs amounted to “material support” for terrorism under INA § 212(a)(3)(B), even if framed as religious or humanitarian assistance.


Singh-Kaur v. Ashcroft, 385 F.3d 293 (3d Cir. 2004)