Geygan & Geygan, Ltd.

A Cincinnati Immigration Law Firm

  • Home
  • About Us
    • Directions
      • Geygan & Geygan, Ltd.
      • Cleveland Immigration Court
      • USCIS Cincinnati Field Office
    • Why I do what I do
  • Immigration
    • Family Immigration Home
      • FIANCÉ(E) (K-1) VISA
      • Adjustment of Status Based on Marriage
      • Removal of Conditions on Status (I-751)
    • Investment Immigration
      • E-2 Treaty Investor Visa
      • EB-5 Visas
    • Employment Immigration
      • Employment-Based Immigration: First Preference EB-1
      • Employment-Based Immigration: Second Preference EB-2
      • Employment Immigration H-1B
    • Naturalization Home
    • Preventing Deportation
      • Immigration Court Video
      • Immigration Law Violations
      • Cancellation of Removal
      • I-212 Waivers
      • I-601 Waiver of Inadmissibility
    • Work Card or Employment Authorization Document
    • Nonimmigrant Options
      • H-1B Visas For Specialty Occupations, Like Yours
      • The B Visas: Business or Pleasure?
      • Types of Visas for Temporary Visitors
      • E-1/E-2 Eligibility Requirements
        • The E-1 Treaty Trader Visa
          • E-1 Treaty Traders Details
        • E-2 Treaty Investor Visa
    • I-601A Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver
    • I-601 Waiver of Inadmissibility
    • Criminal Law and Immigration
    • Temporary Protected Status
  • Legal Information
  • Archive & Site Map
  • Log In / Out

Voting before citizenship makes you deportable.

May 11, 2015 by Thomas Geygan

ImmigrationCourtBannersmallBIA Finds That Respondent Who Voted in a Federal Election Is Removable Under the INA
In a precedent decision issued yesterday, the BIA held that a respondent who has voted in an election involving candidates for federal office in violation of 18 USC §611(a) is removable under section 237(a)(6)(A) of the INA, regardless of whether the respondent knew that he or she was committing an unlawful act by voting. The BIA reasoned that because the respondent, an LPR who had disclosed during a naturalization interview that she had voted in an election in 2006 that included a local school board race, had intentionally voted in an election involving candidates for federal office, the general intent requirement of §611(a) was satisfied.

This sad case is one example of how someone’s life was ruined because they were unaware they were violating the law.  U.S. immigration law is very complicated.  Please make sure you understand the effect of what you have done and what you are signing before you send in any immigration forms.  Our office represents clients before USCIS, the U.S. Consulates, Immigration and Federal Courts.  If you would like to schedule an appointment to discuss your case will me, please call my office or you can schedule an appointment online by clicking here.

Filed Under: Citizenship, Deportation & Removal, Immigration Court, N-400, Naturalization, Uncategorized

Client Resources

May 15, 2017

 

More Posts from this Category

Featured Posts

Court expected to rule on the constitutionality of DACA soon.

Broad warrantless border phone search policy approved

Contact Us

Geygan & Geygan, Ltd.

8050 Hosbrook Road, Suite 107
Cincinnati, Ohio 45236
Tel 513-791-1673
Fax 513-791-1683
info@geygan.com

Disclaimer and Privacy Policy

Lawyer Thomas Geygan | Featured Attorney Immigration

Copyright © 2021 · Enterprise Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in