## Facts

- Karen Yuen Fong Young, born in Hong Kong, was adopted there by a paternal aunt and later immigrated to the United States based on that adoptive parent-child relationship.
- In 1984, after becoming a U.S. citizen, Young filed four family-based immigrant visa petitions seeking fourth-preference classification for her biological siblings in Hong Kong as “brothers and sisters of citizens of the United States.”
- The INS initially approved the petitions and forwarded them for consular processing when visas became available.
- In 1994, when visas became available, the U.S. consulate returned the petitions to the INS, concluding they should not have been approved because Young’s adoption severed her legal relationship with her natural family, including her biological siblings.
- While Young pursued declaratory relief in federal court, the INS revoked three petitions, relying on the BIA’s interpretation that an adoption severing prior legal ties prevents reliance on biological sibling relationships for preference immigration benefits.

## Issues

1. Whether the INS permissibly interpreted the INA to bar an adopted U.S. citizen from sponsoring biological siblings when the adoption severed the prior legal relationship.
2. Whether the BIA’s interpretation reflected in agency adjudication constituted a “new rule” requiring rulemaking rather than case-by-case adjudication.
3. Whether applying the BIA’s interpretation to petitions filed before the relevant BIA decision was impermissibly retroactive.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the government.
- Applying Chevron, the court held Congress had not directly addressed whether an adopted citizen may claim sibling preference through biological ties after an adoption that severed the legal relationship.
- The court held the INS interpretation was reasonable and therefore entitled to deference.
- The court rejected Young’s claims that the BIA announced a new rule and that the agency improperly adopted it through adjudication or applied it retroactively.
- The INS revocations were upheld, and Young could not confer fourth-preference status on her biological siblings based on the severed relationship.

## Legal Principles

- When the INA is silent or ambiguous on a specific family-relationship question, courts apply Chevron and defer to a reasonable agency interpretation.
- Under a reasonable INA construction, an adoption that severs prior legal family ties may preclude an adopted U.S. citizen from claiming immigration benefits based on biological sibling relationships.
- An agency interpretation announced in adjudication is not invalid merely because it affects pending matters; if it is treated as consistent with the statutory scheme rather than a new rule, neither notice-and-comment rulemaking nor a bar on retroactive application is required.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit upheld the INS’s Chevron-entitled interpretation that Young’s adoption severed the immigration-relevant legal sibling relationship with her biological siblings, and it further held that applying that interpretation to her earlier-filed petitions was not an improper new rule or impermissible retroactive action.


Young v. Reno, 114 F.3d 879 (9th Cir. 1997)