Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/13-1034_3dq4.pdf
Page Number: 8.0

Cite as:  575 U. S. ____ (2015) 

5 

Opinion of the Court 

alone  is  not  criminalized  at  all.    See  21  U. S. C.  §863(a)– 
(b).  Nor  does  federal  law  define  drug  paraphernalia  to
include  common  household  or  ready-to-wear  items  like
socks; rather, it defines paraphernalia as any “equipment, 
product,  or  material”  which  is  “primarily  intended  or 
designed  for  use”  in  connection  with  various  drug-related 
activities.  §863(d) (emphasis added).  In 19 States as well, 
the  conduct  for  which  Mellouli  was  convicted—use  of  a 
sock  to  conceal  a  controlled  substance—is  not  a  criminal 
offense.  Brief for National Immigrant Justice Center et al. 
as  Amici  Curiae  7.  At  most,  it  is  a  low-level  infraction, 
often not attended by a right to counsel.  Id., at 9–11. 

The Eighth Circuit denied Mellouli’s petition for review. 
719  F. 3d  995  (2013).  We  granted  certiorari,  573  U. S.
___  (2014),  and  now  reverse  the  judgment  of  the  Eighth 
Circuit. 

II 
We  address  first  the  rationale  offered  by  the  BIA  and
affirmed by the Eighth Circuit, which differentiates para-
phernalia  offenses  from  possession  and  distribution  of-
fenses.  Essential background, in evaluating the rationale 
shared by the BIA and the Eighth Circuit, is the categori-
cal  approach  historically  taken  in  determining  whether  a 
state  conviction  renders  an  alien  removable  under  the 
immigration  statute.3  Because  Congress  predicated  de-

—————— 

3 We  departed  from  the  categorical  approach  in  Nijhawan  v.  Holder, 
557  U. S.  29  (2009),  based  on  the  atypical  cast  of  the  prescription  at
issue,  8  U. S. C.  §1101(a)(43)(M)(i).    That  provision  defines  as  an
“aggravated felony” an offense “involv[ing] fraud or deceit in which the 
loss to the victim or victims exceeds $10,000.”  The following subpara-
graph, (M)(ii), refers to an offense “described in section 7201 of title 26
(relating  to  tax  evasion)  in  which  the  revenue  loss  to  the  Government 
exceeds $10,000.”  No offense “described in section 7201 of title 26,” we 
pointed  out,  “has  a  specific  loss  amount  as  an  element.”    557  U. S.,  at 
38.  Similarly, “no widely applicable federal fraud statute . . . contains a 
relevant monetary loss threshold,” id., at 39, and “[most] States had no