(A)  Not all Offenses Within 18 U.S.C. § 1543 are Included.  The aggravated felony definition does not include all convictions in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1543.  That section of Title 18 punishes:

 

                Whoever falsely makes, forges, counterfeits, mutilates, or alters any passport or instrument purporting to be a passport, with intent that the same may be used; or

                Whoever willfully and knowingly uses, or attempts to use, or furnishes to another for use any such false, forged, counterfeited, mutilated, or altered passport or instrument purporting to be a passport, or any passport validly issued which has become void by the occurrence of any condition therein prescribed invalidating the same.[533]

 

The aggravated felony definition exactly tracks the first paragraph of this criminal statute, but does not include any of the language of the second paragraph.  Since Congress did not use any expansive language, such as “described in” or “relating to,”  a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1543 must have been on the basis of the first paragraph, not the second.  If the record of conviction is unclear as to which paragraph formed the basis of conviction, the government cannot establish the conviction is an aggravated felony.[534]

 

[533] 18 U.S.C. § 1543.

[534] See § § 16.9-16.14, supra. 

BIA

AGGRAVATED FELONY - CONSPIRACY - FRAUD
Matter of SIK, 24 I. & N. Dec. 324 (BIA Oct. 4, 2007) (federal conviction for violation of 18 U.S.C. 371, conspiracy, where the substantive crime that was the object of the conspiracy was an is an aggravated felony under INA 101(a)(43)(M)(i), (U), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(M)(i), (U), since the offense involved "fraud or deceit" and the potential loss to the victim(s) exceeded $10,000).

Other

IMMIGRATION OFFENSES " FEDERAL LAW PREEMPTS STATE IDENTITY FRAUD PROSECUTIONS RELATED TO FEDERAL I-9 FORMS
State v. Reynua, State of Minnesota, Mower County District Court (Jul. 23, 2012) (File No. 50-CR-09-1811) (unpublished) (admission of an I-9 form in a state forgery prosecution was reversible error); on remand after State v. Reynua, 807 N.W.2d 473 (Minn. App. 2011), review granted, revd in part and remanded (Minn. Feb. 28, 2012) (8 U.S.C. 1324a(b)(5) means what it says -- that other than specified federal prosecutions, the I-9 form and appended documents may not be used to establish a state crime).