The Ninth Circuit has determined that the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decisions regarding the immigration consequences of criminal convictions are permissibly retroactive unless the agency’s caselaw is a change from its own prior case law or regulatory interpretation or circuit precedent. In this case, at the time of the petitioner’s plea, the Board of Immigration Appeals had not issued a precedential decision addressing whether his conviction qualified as a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT). As such, there was no change in law to implicate concerns about impermissible retroactive application of the case law that ultimately determined that his conviction is a CIMT.

The full text of Olivas-Motta v. Whitaker can be found here: