The Seventh Circuit has joined the Ninth Circuit and determined that 18 USC 16(b), which provides half of the definition of a crime of violence aggravated felony for immigration purposes, is unconstitutionally vague. Like the Ninth Circuit's decision in Dimaya v. Lynch, the Seventh Circuit relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Johnson v. United States, holding the nearly identically worded residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act to be unconstitutionally vague.
The full text of United States v. Vivas-Ceja can be found here: http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D12-22/C:15-1770:J:Sykes:aut:T:fnOp:N:1676497:S:0
My previously blog post on Dimaya v. Llynch can be found here: http://www.sabrinadamast.com/journal/2015/10/20/ninth-circuit-finds-18-usc-16b-unconstitutionally-vague