Interim Decision • #1466 

MAT= OF Mumma) 

In Exclusion Proceedings 

A-30728749 

Decided by Board May .14, 1985 

The special inquiry officer has authority in exclusion proceedings, in the exercise of discretion, to grant waivers of inadmissibility pursuant to sections 

212(g) and (h), Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, to a native 

and citizen of Mexico who is in possession of an otherwise valid visa and 

who qualities for such relict [Matter of DeF—, 8 L st N. Dec. 68, and Matter of Dea—, 8 L & N. Dec. 325, distingaished.] 

Examaszta: Act of 1952--Section 212(a) (9) [8 II.S.C. 1182(a) (9)3—Admits 

having committed crime involving moral turpitude, perjury. 

Act of 1952—Section 212(a) (12) [8 U.S.C. I182(a) (12)3—En-

' gaged in prostitution. 

Act of 1952—Section 212(a) (19) [8 U.S.C. 1182(a) (19)3—Procured visa or other documentation by willfully 

misrepresenting a material fzet. 

The case comes forward pursuant to certification by the special 

inquiry officer of his order dated March 19, 1965 ordering that the 

applicant be granted a waiver under sections 212(g) and 212(h) 

of the Immigration and Nationality Act of the grounds of her 

excludability under section. 212(a) (12) as an alien who engaged in 

prostitution and under section 212(a) (9) as an alien who has admitted having committed a crime involving moral turpitude, to wit, 

perjury, and under section 212(a) (19) as an alien who has procured 

a visa or other documentation by fraud or by willfully misrepresenting a material fact, and further ordering that the applicant. be 

admitted to the 'United States as a nonquota immigrant. 

The record relates to a native and citizen of Mexico, 30 years old, 

female, married, who arrived at the port of El Paso, Texas on 

December 7, 1961 in possession of a nonquota immigrant visa issued 

to the applicant on December 2, 1964 at the American Consulate, 

Juarez, Mexico. 

,175 
• Interim Decision #1468 

The special inquiry officer has set forth the facts in detail. The 

record establishes- that the applicant practiced prostitution in Juarez, 

Mexico from May until October 1959 voluntarily ,to support herself 

and her three young ehildien; that she obtained a. nonimmigrant 

local border crossing card at Laredo, Texas during the year of 1960 

by concealing from the immigration officers that she had only the 

year before practiced prostitution in Juarez, Mexico, and was aware 

that she would have been refused . a local border crossing card g" 

she had revealed such Activity since she had been denied such a 

document the previous year in El Peso, Texas in October 1959 for 

the same reason. She also concealed the practice of prostitution 

when she executed an application. for a nonquota immigrant visa at 

the American Consulate on Decehiber 2, 1964. Concealment of the 

practice of prostitution was material to the issuance of the •onquota 

immigrant. visa and also to the issuance of the -nonimmigrant local 

;herder .crossini card. Excludability under section 212(a)•(19) of 

The Immigration. and Nationality Act: as an alien who has procured -

a visa or other documentation by willfully misrepresenting a material 

fact; -under section.212(a) (9) as an alien who has admitted having 

committed a crime involving moral turpitude, to wit, perjury 'in connection with the oath for the application for an immigrant visa on 

-December -2, 1964 before the American Consul in Juarez, Mexico.; 

and under section 212(a) (12) as an Slim who has engaged in pros-

'fitution,. is established by the evidence of record. 

The applicant executed. anapplication for a waiver under sections 

212(g) and 212(h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of the 

aforesaid grounds of her inadmissibility .to the United States. The 

''applicant was married on April 9, 1960 to a United States citizen, 

her first marriage having been terminated by a divorce, decree 

rendered in Mexico on January 22, 1959. Three children, who are 

'the issue- of the•first marriage, are lawful permanent residents of 

the United States- and two childre n, who are the issue of the -second 

marriage, are 'citizens of the United States. The evidence establishes 

:.that -thejexeltsion of the -applicant from _the -United; Stales • would 

resultin extreme hardship to her United States citizen husband, her 

two United States Citizen children and her three resident ' ,Alien chil-

=dren. The evidence establishes that the applicant has' not practiced 

prostitution since October 1959 and has completely reha'bili'tated herself since she met her husband and their present relationship is a 

happy and stable one, A report of investigation conducted by the 

Service Contains no derogatory information. There has been no evidence that the -presence of the applicant in the United States would 

be contrary to the national welfare, safety or security of this country. 

176 
Interim Decision #1468 

. - 

The evidence establishes that the applicant is eligible for a waiver 

under sections 212(g) end. 212(h) of the Act. Such a waiver has 

been granted nano pro tune in deportation proceedingi to cure a 

ground of inadmissibility existing at the time of entry.' The basis 

for the certification of the decision of the apecial inquiry officer 

apparently rests upon the holdings in Matter of DeF—, 8 I: & N. 

Dec. 88, and Matter of D80—, 8 I. & N. Dec. 325. The former case 

held that aliens within the United States who are ineligible for 

preexamination cannot be granted. advance waivers of inadmissibility 

under sections 5 and 7 of the Act of September 11, 1957 while they 

remain in the United States and that natives and citizens of 

contiguous territory to whom preexamination procedures are inapplicable, must depart and apply for 'waivers at the time they 

make applications to enter the United States from their native 

country. The latter case involved the issue whether the Board had 

power to grant discretionary relief under sections .5 and 7. of the 

Act of September 11, 1957 (P.L. 85-316) to authorize the advance 

waiver of certain grounds which prevented the issuance of visas 

and which barred entry into the United. States. The Attorney 

General held that advance -waivers of inadmissibility under sections 

5 and 7 of the Act of September 11, 1957 were not authorized to 

facilitate future admission of aliens ordered excluded and disposition 

of waiver requests must - await return to foreign territory and compliance with the procedure established by 8 CFR 212.7 (a). 2 

here the applicant is actually in possession of a nonquota immigrant visa, an entrant alien seeking admission to the United States. 

If the waivers of-sections 212(g) 'and (h) are exercised, no further 

action is required. Section 286(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act authorizes a special inquiry officer to conduct a hearing 

and to determine whether an arriving alien who has been detained 

for further inquiry under section 235 shall be allowed to enter or 

shall be excluded and .deported. The applicable regulation, 8 CFR 

236.1, provides that special inquiry officers shall have the powers 

and authority conferted upon them by the Act and this chapter, 

and subject to any specific limitation prescribed by the Act and this 

chapter, special inquiry officers shall also exercise the discretionary 

authority conferred. upon the Attorney General by the Act as it is 

• appropriate and necessary for the disposition of such cases. 

'Matter of P—, 7 L & N. Dee. 718. 

'Sections 5 and 7 of the Act of September 11, 1957 have been codified into 

the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1852 of sections 212(g) and 212(h) by 

the Act of September 20, 1961 (P.1,. 87-301). 

177 
Interim Decision *1468 

In the. present case the exercise of discretionary relief pursuant to 

sections 212(g) and 212(h) - of the Immigration and Nationality Act 

will effectively eliminate the grounds of inadmissibility and will 

concurrently render the visa valid." The instant ease differs in its 

facts from Matter of DeF—, and Matter of DeG—, supra. The 

former case involved an alien within the United States who was 

ineligible for preexamination and was required to depart and apply 

for a waiver at the time of making application,for a -visa. In the 

latter case there were involved a number of aliens who were 

physically present in the United States and were required to leave to 

obtain visas so that they might rejoin their families in the -United 

States and it was held that advance waiver request must await return 

to foreign territory and compliance with procedure established by 

8 CFR 212.7(a). The order of the special inquiry officer will be 

approved. 

ORDER: It is ordered- that the order of the special inquiry officer 

dated March 19, 1965 granting the applicant -waivers under sections. 

212(g) and 212(h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act and 

ordering the applicant admitted. to the United States as a nonquote 

immigrant be and the same is hereby approved. 

'Compare Matter of CI—, 8 I. I N. Dee. M. 

178 '