American women looking to sever ties with their foreign-born husbands might trigger intensified government actions against marriage fraud.

For the first time, the Immigration Appeals Committee (BIA) will assess whether U.S. citizens can contest a previously approved I-130 petition due to new evidence of marriage deception, based on legal documents obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation. This specific case involves a naturalized U.S. citizen claiming her Chinese husband wed her only for a green card, which could have significant national implications.

Marriage-based petitions represent the largest category within green card applications, according to government statistics. The BIA, which has tailored its role to review decisions from the U.S. immigration court system, had previously mainly supported foreign appeals.

“The Immigration Appeals Board must determine if regulations permit U.S. citizens to challenge earlier approvals of marriage petitions due to newly discovered fraud,” said petitioner’s lawyer Cody Brown to the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The wife, who chose to keep her identity private, is appealing based on alleged marriage fraud. In her application to the BIA, she mentioned plans to gain legal permanent residency while on a temporary visa and provided evidence of her recovery from injuries sustained while on heavy medication, suggesting she received her green card through the fraudulent marriage.

Her situation is notable because she is contesting an already approved I-130 petition. This form is submitted to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) by a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.

Central to this case is a specific regulation granted to the BIA, giving it jurisdiction over Department of Homeland Security decisions. Brown argues that “decision” encompasses both approvals and rejections. If the BIA agrees with Brown’s interpretation, he hopes that increased scrutiny might arise over previously approved petitions in response to complaints.

“This represents a significant test of the seriousness of the Trump administration regarding cross-border enforcement,” Brown stated. “Claiming a ‘war on fraud’ seems meaningless if there are career staff within the DOJ that continue to shield against the reviews of unauthorized approvals.”

Background on Enforcement

Under U.S. law, marriage fraud is a serious offense. If found guilty, immigrants can lose their access to benefits. Nonetheless, advocates have long pointed out that federal agencies have not made this issue a priority.

Marriage remains the primary pathway for immigrants seeking legal permanent residency. In 2023, over 755,800 immigrants acquired green cards through family sponsorship, with 276,080 of these through spousal sponsorships, according to DHS data. Alarmingly, available figures indicate almost no action has been taken against marriage fraud.

Instead of regularly disclosing fraud denial statistics, USCIS typically shares data from Freedom of Information Act requests, with the subject matter largely appearing in legal documents from petitioners.

FOIA data reveals that between 2016 and 2019, federal immigration officials issued virtually no denials among the major forms associated with marriage-based immigration challenges.

Insiders within the agency note that the lack of enforcement regarding marriage fraud has been a long-standing issue.

“USCIS and DOJ have been aware of the incredibly high rates of marriage fraud for decades,” stated Matt O’Brien, a former chief of USCIS fraud detection. “Yet, pressure from pro-immigrant groups and the DOJ’s reluctance to pursue cases where victory isn’t guaranteed fostered an environment with minimal consequences for those entering fraudulent marriages to secure green cards.”

“This also encourages misuse of other programs, such as those designed to support victims of domestic violence, often exploited to gain green cards.”

Brown, who manages a law firm dedicated to representing victims of immigration fraud, noted his unfamiliarity with such widespread issues. In July, he led a coalition of marriage fraud victims, urging federal immigration authorities to formalize a process for addressing cases where fraud is revealed after petitions are approved.

Typically, evidence of one-sided marriage fraud surfaces only after the approval of the petition, and due to the absence of a formal review process, victims are left with little recourse.

“For a foreigner seeking profit, there are numerous avenues available,” Brown stated. “On the other hand, if a U.S. citizen uncovers fraud afterward, they’re generally directed to submit tips without any assurance.”

Efforts to Combat Fraud

The Trump administration has aimed to enforce stricter measures against marriage fraud amidst a broader crackdown on illegal immigration.

In March, USCIS dismantled a significant domestic marriage fraud operation, revealing a network of individuals involved in a scheme that allegedly generated millions through fraudulent practices, in collaboration with immigration enforcement. Individuals involved in this scheme reportedly charged between $20,000 and $40,000 per fraudulent marriage, resulting in estimated illegal profits of about $4 million.

However, this initiative focused on classic fake marriages, while one-sided marriage fraud cases pose far greater challenges for authorities.

After returning to the agency earlier this year, USCIS director Joe Edrow discovered substantial gaps in addressing immigration fraud that had persisted during the Biden administration. Edrow is now focused on issues like asylum fraud and is strengthening oversight of immigration programs, pledging to take further action.

Following President Donald Trump’s inauguration, changes were made in the immigration court system, where judges viewed as misaligned with his policy agenda were dismissed. This shift symbolizes the administration’s commitment to aggressively reducing illegal immigration and responding to marriage fraud.

In response to inquiries, the BIA’s parent agency acknowledged its jurisdiction over family-based immigration petitions, but directed questions about petition approvals to the DHS. An EOIR spokesperson indicated that the agency is intentional about addressing immigration fraud.