The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) has issued a significant ruling affecting immigrants who leave the United States under advance parole. In a decision dated August 13, 2026, the BIA clarified that such departures are considered a "departure" under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). This ruling could have major implications for many immigrants seeking to adjust their status, particularly those who have previously relied on a different interpretation of the law.
The case, Matter of Milagro Delcarmen-Lara (Docket ID 4233), centers around Delcarmen-Lara, a native of El Salvador, who sought to reopen her immigration proceedings after being paroled back into the U.S. on January 1, 2024. The BIA's decision overrules a previous ruling from 2012, which stated that leaving the U.S. under advance parole did not constitute a departure for the purposes of the INA. This change means that individuals who leave the U.S. under advance parole may now face inadmissibility issues if they seek to return.
Background
Milagro Delcarmen-Lara has had a complicated immigration history. She was ordered removed from the United States in 2006 after being found removable under section 212(a)(6)(A)(i) of the INA. In 2013, she was granted Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), which allowed her to stay in the country temporarily. On June 30, 2015, she attempted to reopen her case to apply for a waiver of inadmissibility but was denied due to untimeliness.
In her latest attempt, Delcarmen-Lara filed a motion to reopen her case on May 27, 2025, to pursue adjustment of status based on an approved visa petition from her husband. She presented evidence of her temporary departure from the U.S. under advance parole, which was granted in January 2024. The BIA had to decide whether this departure would affect her eligibility for adjustment of status.
The Ruling
The BIA ruled that a departure from the United States under advance parole is indeed a "departure" under section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) of the INA. This decision overrules the previous ruling in Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly, which had held that such departures did not count as a departure for the purposes of inadmissibility. Deputy Chief Appellate Immigration Judge Gorman stated, "We now clarify that the term 'departure' under this section of the INA does not include an exception for aliens who leave the country temporarily under a grant of advance parole."
This ruling means that individuals who leave the U.S. under advance parole could be deemed inadmissible if they have been unlawfully present in the country for more than one year. The BIA emphasized that its decision is based on the plain language of the statute, which does not provide exceptions for advance parolees.
Impact
This ruling could significantly affect many immigrants who have relied on the previous interpretation of the law. By clarifying that departures under advance parole count as a departure for inadmissibility purposes, the BIA has changed the landscape for those seeking to adjust their status after leaving the U.S.
The decision may lead to increased challenges for immigrants who have previously left the U.S. under advance parole, as they may now face new barriers to returning or adjusting their status. The ruling also underscores the importance of understanding the nuances of immigration law, especially as interpretations can shift over time.
What's Next
Delcarmen-Lara's case may not be the last of its kind. The BIA's decision can potentially be appealed to a higher court, and it remains to be seen how this ruling will be applied in future cases. Additionally, other immigrants who have left the U.S. under advance parole may need to reassess their situations in light of this new interpretation of the law.