I received an unpublished decision from the BIA that found that misuse of an identification document under 18 U.S.C. § 1546(b)(1) is not categorically a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) that would preclude statutory eligibility for cancellation of removal.

In providing a categorical analysis the BIA noted that 18 U.S.C. § 1546(b)(1) punishes the use of "an identification document, knowing (or having reason to know) that the document was not issued lawfully for the use of the possessor, but does not have the element of an intent to defraud. The Board reasoned that because the crime does not have fraudulent or evil intent as an element it is not categorically a CIMT, and the Immigration Judge erred in determining the respondent was not statutorily eligible for cancellation of removal. The case has been remanded back to the Immigration Judge to further consider my client's cancellation application.

Not ironically, in rendering its decision the BIA cited one of my previous cases where I successfully argued at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals before a three-judge panel headed by Sonia Sotomayor that the crime of falsely representing a social security number with an intent to deceive is also not categorically a CIMT.