New BIA Decision: Advance Parole Travel Can Trigger the 10-Year Unlawful-Presence Bar

By Li Law Group, LLC | Updated August 15, 2026

Key takeaway: Beginning August 13, 2026, a trip outside the United States under advance parole can count as a departure for the ten-year unlawful-presence bar. Anyone with possible prior unlawful presence should obtain a case-specific legal review before traveling.

On August 13, 2026, the Board of Immigration Appeals issued Matter of Delcarmen-Lara, 29 I&N Dec. 830 (BIA 2026). The precedential decision changes an important part of the legal analysis for people considering international travel with advance parole.

For more than a decade, Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly treated an authorized trip under advance parole as something other than a departure for the ten-year unlawful-presence bar. Matter of Delcarmen-Lara overruled that holding. The BIA now says that leaving the United States under advance parole is a departure within the meaning of INA section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II).

This does not mean every person who travels with advance parole becomes inadmissible. It does mean that approval of an Advance Parole Document is no longer enough to answer the unlawful-presence question. The traveler's full immigration history must be reviewed before departure.

What Is Advance Parole?

Advance parole is travel authorization that may allow certain noncitizens in the United States to leave temporarily and then present themselves at a U.S. port of entry to request parole. It is commonly used by some applicants with a pending adjustment-of-status case and by some DACA recipients who qualify for travel authorization.

An Advance Parole Document is not a visa, an admission, a waiver, or a guarantee of entry. U.S. Customs and Border Protection makes the parole decision when the traveler seeks to return. USCIS approval also does not establish that the traveler will be admissible for adjustment of status after returning.

What Did Matter of Delcarmen-Lara Change?

The ten-year unlawful-presence bar generally applies when a person has accumulated one year or more of unlawful presence, departs or is removed, and again seeks admission within ten years of that departure or removal. An adjustment applicant must also prove admissibility.

In 2012, the BIA decided Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly. That decision held that temporary travel under advance parole did not count as a departure for this specific unlawful-presence ground. Many travel and adjustment strategies relied on that precedent.

Matter of Delcarmen-Lara rejected the old interpretation. The BIA reasoned that the statute does not create an advance-parole exception to the ordinary meaning of departure. It therefore overruled Arrabally and held that an advance-parole trip can trigger INA section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II).

The New Holding Is Prospective

The timing limitation is important. The BIA expressly analyzed retroactivity and decided to apply its new holding prospectively because Arrabally was longstanding precedent and people had relied on it. The Board therefore did not apply the new interpretation to the respondent's January 2024 advance-parole trip.

USCIS now states on its Form I-131 page and in its unlawful-presence guidance that, as of August 13, 2026, departure after obtaining an Advance Parole Document is a departure for this inadmissibility analysis.

A document issued before August 13 should not be treated as grandfathering future travel under the old rule. The date of departure, the amount of unlawful presence accrued before departure, and any applicable exception or waiver must be examined separately.

Who May Face the Greatest Risk?

The decision creates the most immediate concern for a person who:

• accumulated one year or more of unlawful presence before leaving the United States;

• departs on or after August 13, 2026, using advance parole;

• seeks admission or adjustment of status within ten years after that departure; and

• does not have an applicable statutory exception, waiver, or other legal basis to overcome the ground of inadmissibility.

Calculating unlawful presence is not always the same as deciding whether a person had lawful immigration status. The calculation may depend on age, I-94 expiration, prior immigration filings, periods of deferred action, pending applications, departures, removal orders, and other events.

Who Is Not Automatically Subject to the Ten-Year Bar?

Matter of Delcarmen-Lara does not create a ten-year bar for every advance-parole traveler. A person may not fall within the holding if, for example:

• the person did not accumulate one year or more of unlawful presence before departure;

• the potentially relevant time occurred before age 18 and does not count under the statutory rule;

• a period of stay authorized by the government stopped further accrual, although earlier time may still matter;

• the travel occurred before the prospective effective point addressed by the BIA; or

• a statutory exception, waiver, or specialized adjustment provision applies.

These examples are not a substitute for a complete review. Even if the ten-year bar does not apply, a traveler may face another inadmissibility ground, a prior-removal issue, a jurisdiction problem, or a separate travel risk.

What Does This Mean for DACA Recipients?

USCIS explains in its DACA frequently asked questions that a person generally does not accrue unlawful presence while deferred action is in effect. That protection does not erase unlawful presence accumulated before DACA, during a gap, or after deferred action ends.

A DACA recipient should not assume that current deferred action makes advance-parole travel safe. The analysis should identify the person's age during each period, the dates of every DACA grant and renewal, any gaps, prior entries and departures, and any removal order.

Advance Parole May Still Matter for Adjustment of Status

Matter of Delcarmen-Lara does not eliminate advance parole. A return under parole may still matter to the threshold requirement in INA section 245(a) that an adjustment applicant was inspected and admitted or paroled. But satisfying that threshold is only one part of adjustment eligibility.

An adjustment applicant must also be admissible and must overcome any other statutory bars. A person may therefore return as a parolee yet still face a ten-year unlawful-presence issue when USCIS or an immigration judge decides the adjustment application.

What Happened to the Respondent in the BIA Case?

The respondent was a citizen of El Salvador with a final removal order, DACA, an approved family petition, and a January 2024 return under advance parole. She filed a second motion to reopen so she could pursue adjustment of status.

Although the BIA announced the new advance-parole rule, it did not apply that rule retroactively to her 2024 trip. The Board nevertheless denied reopening because her motion was filed more than sixteen years after the final order, was her second motion, and did not satisfy an exception to the time and number limits. The case therefore also shows that becoming potentially eligible for adjustment does not automatically reopen an old removal order.

Steps to Take Before International Travel

Before leaving the United States with advance parole, a traveler should obtain an individualized review that includes the following steps:

1. Create a complete immigration timeline. Identify every entry, I-94 expiration, filing, approval, denial, DACA period, departure, and return.

2. Calculate unlawful presence. Determine when it started, when it stopped, and whether any statutory exception or period of authorized stay applies.

3. Review prior orders and inadmissibility grounds. A removal order, unlawful reentry, fraud issue, criminal record, or prior departure may create additional consequences.

4. Analyze the purpose of travel and the immigration benefit being pursued. Confirm how travel may affect adjustment jurisdiction, eligibility, and any pending application.

5. Decide whether travel should be postponed. Nonessential travel may not justify the immigration risk when the legal analysis is incomplete.

6. Plan for return and later adjudication. Carry valid documents and understand that parole at the border does not resolve admissibility at the green-card stage.

   
   

Frequently Asked Questions

Did Matter of Delcarmen-Lara cancel advance parole?

No. Advance parole remains available in qualifying cases. The decision changes the consequences that a departure may have for a person who accumulated unlawful presence.

Does every advance-parole traveler now receive a ten-year bar?

No. The person must fall within the statutory elements, including one year or more of unlawful presence before the relevant departure. Other exceptions and waivers may also matter.

What if USCIS issued my Advance Parole Document before August 13,

2026?

Do not assume the earlier issuance date preserves the old rule for a later departure. USCIS states that departures on or after August 13, 2026 are treated as departures for this analysis.

What if I traveled with advance parole before August 13, 2026?

The BIA stated that its new holding is prospective and declined to apply it to the respondent's January 2024 trip. A prior traveler should still obtain advice about the exact travel date, procedural posture, circuit law, and any other inadmissibility issue.

Does advance parole guarantee that I can return?

No. The document allows the traveler to present at a port of entry and request parole. It does not guarantee parole, admission, or approval of an adjustment application.

Can the unlawful-presence bar be waived?

A waiver may be available in some cases, but eligibility depends on the specific ground, the existence of a qualifying relative, the required hardship showing, and the person's procedural posture. A waiver should not be assumed before travel.

Speak With an Omaha Immigration Lawyer Before Traveling

Advance-parole decisions now require a fresh review. Li Law Group's Omaha immigration lawyers can review unlawful presence, DACA history, adjustment eligibility, prior removal proceedings, and waiver options before a client leaves the United States.

Schedule a consultation with Li Law Group before making international travel plans or relying on an existing Advance Parole Document.

Disclaimer: This article provides general information and is not legal advice. Immigration consequences depend on the complete record, applicable circuit law, agency guidance, and later legal developments. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship.