Criminal Defense of Immigrants

(E)  Effective Date.  The “admission” language was not added to the controlled substances grounds of inadmissibility until November 29, 1990.[117]  Therefore, the Second Circuit has held that where a noncitizen was admitted prior to that date, he could not be found deportable as being inadmissible at time of admission to the United States on the basis of having made an admission to the immigration authorities taken at a point after that date.[118]  The CMT admission language predates even the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952.[119]

[117] Immigration Act of 1990, Pub.L. No. 101-649, § 5089, 104 Stat. 4978, 5051 (Nov. 29, 1990).

[118] Francis v. Gonzales, 442 F.3d 131 (2d Cir. Mar. 27, 2006).

[119] See Matter of RR, 6 I. & N. Dec. 55 (BIA 1953, BIA 1954, AG 1955) (INA

§ 212(a)(9), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9), which excludes “aliens who admit committing acts which constitute the essential elements of such a crime [involving moral turpitude],” is applicable to offenses committed prior to as well as those committed after the effective date of the Immigration and Nationality Act). Before 1952, an admission of commission of a CMT could be used as a ground of inadmissibility only if the noncitizen admitted the legal conclusion that s/he had committed the specific crime, after its elements had been explained to him or her.  The 1952 Act created a ground of inadmissibility when a noncitizen admits committing acts which constitute the essential elements of a crime involving moral turpitude.  To lessen the harshness of this provision, Congress amended the statute to establish strict requirements governing under what circumstances a noncitizen will be considered to have admitted committing a CMT or acts constituting the essential elements of a CMT.