BIA Redefines Money Laundering Analysis Using Case-Specific Criteria
The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) has determined that for the purpose of assessing whether an offense constitutes a money laundering aggravated felony, the circumstance-specific approach applies to the requirement that the “amount of the funds exceeded $10,000”.
The BIA’s Rationale
The BIA’s ruling clarifies the methodology for determining if a conviction qualifies as a money laundering aggravated felony under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). This is specifically under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(D). An offense falls into this category if it involves money laundering and the amount of funds exceeds a $10,000 threshold.
The BIA distinguished between the “categorical approach” and the “circumstance-specific approach” in this determination. However, the BIA concluded that the $10,000 monetary threshold in the money laundering statute is a circumstance of the crime, not an element of a generic crime. This is consistent with the Supreme Court’s reasoning in Nijhawan v. Holder. The Court held that a similar $10,000 threshold for fraud offenses was also a circumstance-specific inquiry.
Instead, they can consider “any admissible evidence” to determine if the amount exceeded $10,000. The BIA noted that this is a more flexible method. It allows for a broader review of the facts surrounding the conviction. The BIA’s decision in Dominguez Reyes aligns with its prior rulings on fraud-related aggravated felonies. It provides a clear framework for applying this standard to money laundering convictions.
The BIA’s conclusion effectively means that immigration authorities can use evidence beyond the conviction record. This includes charging documents, plea agreements, or other court records. They use these to demonstrate that a non-citizen’s money laundering conviction involved funds exceeding the $10,000 threshold. This is a significant development, as it gives the government more latitude. They can prove that an offense is an aggravated felony, which has severe immigration consequences, including potential ineligibility for various forms of relief and mandatory detention.
