The Third Circuit has disagreed with the Board of Immigration Appeals' (BIA) assessment of when a crime is “connected to” the abuse an applicant for VAWA cancellation has endured.
“As a threshold matter, we are not convinced that the Chevron framework applies here because interpreting ‘connected to’ does not implicate the BIA’s ‘expertise in a meaningful way.’ Rather it appears to be ‘a pure question of statutory construction for the courts to decide.’ Even if the Chevron framework did apply, ‘connected to’ is unambiguous as discussed below and therefore, the meaning of ‘connected to’ is resolved under the first step of Chevron.”
“Dictionaries define the word ‘connected’ similarly. Miriam-Webster defines it as ‘having the parts or elements logically linked together;’ the Oxford English Dictionary defines it as ‘related, associated (in idea or nature);’ and Black’s Law Dictionary defines it as ‘to associate as in occurrence or in idea.’ Together, these definitions indicate that the term ‘connected to’ means ‘having a causal or logical relationship.’
“A narrow construction, like the one the BIA adopted here, would frustrate this statute’s larger goal by limiting the exception to those who committed crimes at the direction of their abuser. There are other reasons for which an abused spouse might commit acts that, absent the abuse, would indicate bad character. We do not need to develop that list in connection with this case, but at the same time we should not limit the applicability of the exception in a way that is contrary to the intent of the statute.”
The court also rejected a USCIS memo with a more narrow definition of “connected to,” finding it unpersuasive.
The full text of Ramos de Silva v. Attorney General can be found here:
https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/181699p.pdf