Deportability versus inadmissibility
There are two lists of criminal grounds, and which one applies to you depends on whether you were admitted to the United States and whether you are applying for anything. A person who was admitted is charged under the deportability grounds in INA 237(a)(2). A person who entered without inspection, or who is applying for admission or adjustment, is tested against the inadmissibility grounds in INA 212(a)(2). The lists overlap, but each has grounds and exceptions the other lacks, and the burden of proof is on a different party. The same plea can put you on one list and not the other.
Current as of October 2026. We re-check this page regularly and after any rule change.
The first question in any plea review is not what the crime is. It is which list the person is on. The answer changes the grounds that apply, the exceptions that are available, who has to prove what, and which forms of relief are at stake. This page sorts out the two lists. The grounds themselves are explained one by one on the crimes and removal page, and the status page works through what each list does to each kind of person.
Who is on which list
An admission is a lawful entry after inspection at a port of entry. Adjustment of status inside the country can be an admission too, and under Matter of Alyazji, 25 I&N Dec. 397 (BIA 2011), the five-year clock in the single-CIMT deportability ground runs from the admission by virtue of which you were present when the crime was committed. Once admitted, you are charged, if at all, under INA 237(a)(2).
A person who entered without inspection was never admitted and is treated as an applicant for admission. The inadmissibility grounds in INA 212(a)(2) are that person's list. A person who was admitted but is now applying for adjustment of status, a visa or another benefit is tested against inadmissibility by the application, because under INA 245(a)(2) adjustment requires admissibility, on top of whatever the deportability list says about the conviction itself.
A returning permanent resident is normally not treated as seeking admission. INA 101(a)(13)(C) lists six exceptions, and one of them, (C)(v), is having committed an offense identified in 212(a)(2), unless 212(h) or cancellation relief has been granted since. A resident who travels after committing such an offense is inspected against the inadmissibility list on return. Under Vartelas v. Holder, 566 U.S. 257 (2012), that rule does not apply to a conviction that predates IIRIRA's April 1, 1997 effective date; those travelers are governed by the older "brief, casual and innocent" standard. The travel page covers this.
Most people are on both lists at some point
A green card holder who will apply for naturalization, a visa holder who will adjust, a person who entered without inspection and has a pending family petition: each is charged under one list and tested against the other by the application. The plea has to clear both. When a plea clears one list and not the other, the stricter result controls the advice.
The two lists, side by side
| Ground | Deportability, INA 237(a)(2) | Inadmissibility, INA 212(a)(2) |
|---|---|---|
| Crime involving moral turpitude | One CIMT committed within 5 years of admission for which a sentence of one year or longer may be imposed, (A)(i); or two or more CIMTs not arising out of a single scheme, at any time, regardless of sentence, (A)(ii). Under Matter of Adetiba, 20 I&N Dec. 506 (BIA 1992), separate crimes on separate occasions are not a single scheme | Conviction of, or admission of the essential elements of, one CIMT, (A)(i)(I). Subject to the petty offense exception and the juvenile exception |
| Aggravated felony | Any aggravated felony at any time after admission, (A)(iii) | No ground by that name. The offense may still be a CIMT or a drug offense |
| Controlled substances | Conviction of any law relating to a controlled substance in 21 U.S.C. 802, other than a single offense of possession for one's own use of 30 grams or less of marijuana, (B)(i); and being a drug abuser or addict at any time after admission, no conviction needed, (B)(ii) | Conviction of, or admission of, any violation relating to a controlled substance, (A)(i)(II), with no marijuana exception; and reason to believe the person is or has been a trafficker or has knowingly assisted one, no conviction needed, (C) |
| Firearms | Conviction of purchasing, selling, owning, possessing or carrying a firearm or destructive device as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921(a), (C) | No ground |
| Domestic violence, stalking, child abuse; protection orders | Conviction of a crime of domestic violence, stalking, child abuse, neglect or abandonment, (E)(i); a court finding of a violation of the protective part of a protection order, no conviction needed, (E)(ii) | No ground |
| Failure to register as a sex offender | Conviction under 18 U.S.C. 2250, (A)(v) | No ground |
| Multiple convictions | No separate ground | Two or more convictions with aggregate sentences to confinement of 5 years or more, regardless of single scheme or moral turpitude, (B) |
| Prostitution and commercialized vice | No separate ground | Within 10 years of the application, (D) |
| Serious crime with immunity; trafficking in persons; money laundering | No ground | (E); reason to believe, (H); reason to believe, (I) |
INA 237(a)(2)(A)-(E); INA 212(a)(2)(A)-(I). Two related grounds sit outside the criminal subsections: a false claim to United States citizenship is a ground of inadmissibility under INA 212(a)(6)(C)(ii), with no 212(h) waiver, and a ground of deportability under INA 237(a)(3)(D); a document fraud conviction under 18 U.S.C. 1546 is a ground of deportability under INA 237(a)(3)(B)(iii).
The exceptions each list has that the other lacks
The inadmissibility list is longer, reaches conduct without a conviction, and has no marijuana exception. It also has the only two exceptions written into the CIMT ground.
- The petty offense exception. Under INA 212(a)(2)(A)(ii)(II), a single CIMT does not make you inadmissible if the maximum penalty possible did not exceed one year and the sentence imposed did not exceed six months, regardless of suspension. One offense only. It belongs to the inadmissibility list; the deportability ground for a single CIMT has its own test. A misdemeanor with a one-year maximum can be inside the exception for inadmissibility and still, if committed within five years of admission, a ground of deportability, because a sentence of one year "may be imposed." The petty offense page goes through it.
- The juvenile exception. Under INA 212(a)(2)(A)(ii)(I), the CIMT ground does not apply if the crime was committed when you were under 18 and more than five years before the application for a visa or admission.
The deportability list has one exception of its own, the 30-gram marijuana carve-out in 237(a)(2)(B)(i) for a single offense of possession for personal use. The inadmissibility drug ground has no exception; the same offense is instead one of the few drug grounds the 212(h) waiver can reach. The deportability list also has two grounds with no inadmissibility counterpart at all, firearms and domestic violence, and there is no 212(h) waiver for either because there is nothing in 212(a)(2) to waive. A person deportable for a firearms offense may still be admissible.
Admissions count on the inadmissibility list
INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i) reaches a person who admits committing a CIMT or a controlled-substance violation, or admits its essential elements, and 212(a)(2)(C) reaches a person the government has reason to believe is a trafficker, with no conviction and no admission. A plea colloquy, an allocution, or a factual basis you agree to in a case that ends without a conviction can be an admission. What you say in court is part of the record for every future application.
The burdens
| Posture | Who proves it | Standard | Authority |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admitted person charged as deportable | DHS | Clear and convincing evidence | INA 240(c)(3)(A); 8 C.F.R. 1240.8(a); Woodby v. INS, 385 U.S. 276 (1966) |
| Applicant for admission, including a person who entered without inspection | The applicant | Clearly and beyond doubt entitled to be admitted | INA 240(c)(2); 8 C.F.R. 1240.8(b)-(c) |
| Any applicant for relief, on either list | The applicant | Must establish eligibility and disprove an apparent mandatory-denial ground by a preponderance; an inconclusive record counts against the applicant | 8 C.F.R. 1240.8(d); Pereida v. Wilkinson, 592 U.S. 224 (2021) |
The burden matters at the plea because it decides what an ambiguous record does. On the deportability list, a record that does not show which subsection of a divisible statute you pleaded to can defeat the charge. On the inadmissibility list, and on every application for relief, the same record can defeat you. The categorical approach page explains how that happens.
One plea, two answers
Because the lists differ, a single plea can land on one and not the other, and the advice depends on which one you will face.
Inadmissible but not deportable
A single CIMT committed six years after admission is not a 237(a)(2)(A)(i) ground, but it is a 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) ground unless the petty offense exception applies. A single small-marijuana possession is excepted from deportability and not from inadmissibility. A green card holder with either conviction is not charged, but is inadmissible on return from travel under 101(a)(13)(C)(v) and needs a 212(h) waiver to adjust or to come back.
Deportable but not inadmissible
A firearms possession offense is a 237(a)(2)(C) ground and appears nowhere in 212(a)(2). A person who entered without inspection is not inadmissible for it; a green card holder is deportable for it. The same is true of the domestic violence and protection order grounds in 237(a)(2)(E), subject to the separate question whether the offense is also a CIMT.
Both, through relief
Non-LPR cancellation of removal under INA 240A(b)(1) is barred by a conviction under 212(a)(2), 237(a)(2) or 237(a)(3), so for that application both lists apply at once, whichever one you are charged under.
The plea strategy that follows from this is on the plea strategy pages: for a person who will be charged, keep the offense off the charging list; for a person who will apply, keep it off the inadmissibility list and inside an exception or a waiver; for most people, both.
Read next: the petty offense exception, drug offenses, firearms offenses, or travel after a plea.
Common questions
I have a green card. Which list applies to me?
Deportability, INA 237(a)(2), for a conviction while you are here, and DHS has to prove the ground by clear and convincing evidence. But a permanent resident who travels after committing an offense identified in 212(a)(2) is treated as seeking admission on return under INA 101(a)(13)(C)(v), and a permanent resident who applies for naturalization or for a waiver is tested against inadmissibility and good moral character as well. Under Vartelas v. Holder that travel rule does not reach a conviction entered before April 1, 1997.
Can a plea make me inadmissible without making me deportable?
Yes. A single crime involving moral turpitude committed more than five years after your admission, or carrying a maximum sentence of less than one year, is not a ground of deportability, but it is a ground of inadmissibility unless it fits the petty offense exception. A single possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana for personal use is excepted from the deportability ground but not from the inadmissibility ground. And the inadmissibility list reaches admissions and reason-to-believe findings that need no conviction at all.
Can a plea make me deportable without making me inadmissible?
Yes. The firearms ground in 237(a)(2)(C) and the domestic violence, stalking, child abuse and protection order grounds in 237(a)(2)(E) have no counterpart on the inadmissibility list. A person deportable for one of them may still be admissible, which matters for adjustment of status and for the 212(h) waiver, because there is nothing in 212(a)(2) to waive. Whether the same offense is also a crime involving moral turpitude is a separate question.
Who has to prove it?
On deportability, DHS, by clear and convincing evidence under INA 240(c)(3)(A). On admissibility, you, clearly and beyond doubt under INA 240(c)(2). On any application for relief, you, under 8 C.F.R. 1240.8(d), and under Pereida v. Wilkinson an inconclusive record of conviction counts against the applicant.
Tell us about the charge before you take the plea. Not after.
You get a free conversation with an immigration attorney, in your language. We speak English, Russian, Spanish and Uzbek in-house, and we bring in a live interpreter for anything else. We will read the charge against the immigration statute, tell you what the offered plea does to your status and to every form of relief, and tell you what to ask your criminal lawyer to negotiate instead. If the plea has already been entered, we will tell you what can still be done.