§ 12.35 5. Visa Fraud
For more text, click "Next Page>"
Counsel can argue that the visa fraud ground of inadmissibility does not apply to a minor, when an adult (other than a parent) presents a fraudulent document on the minor’s behalf to gain entry to the United States. The Ninth Circuit has imputed fraud from parent to child, but there is no authority for doing so where an unrelated adult presents fraudulent documents on the minor’s behalf. From a common law standpoint, where a minor cannot enter into a contract because of lack of capacity, it does not make sense to find that a minor can commit fraud.
When the child is under 18, there is a good argument that s/he cannot knowingly commit fraud. If someone else (but not the child) indicated that the child was a USC by presenting a USC birth certificate at the border, the child did not make a false claim to United States citizenship, or engage in visa fraud, but merely made an EWI entry.
 Senica v. INS, 16 F.3d 1013 (9th Cir. Feb. 14, 1993) (parent’s knowledge of a child’s ineligibility for admission to the U.S. can be imputed to the child to preclude discretionary relief under INA § 212(k); effectively prevents a parent from making a derivative claim for a waiver under INA § 241(f) as the parent of a noncitizen lawfully admitted for permanent residence).
 Case Summary, Children Lack Capacity to Make False Claims or Misrepresentations, IJ Holds, 83 Interpreter Releases 775-776 (Apr. 24, 2006).