Can a Governor's Pardon Stop Deportation? New York Pardons and INA § 237(a)(2)(A)(vi)

A full pardon from a governor can erase some, but not all, immigration consequences of a state conviction. A Supreme Court case from New York made the point in September 2026.

What the statute says

Section 237(a)(2)(A)(vi) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, in 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A), provides that the deportability grounds in clauses (i) through (iv) do not apply to a conviction if the person later received a full and unconditional pardon from the President or from the Governor of any State. Those clauses cover crimes involving moral turpitude, multiple criminal convictions, aggravated felonies and high-speed flight from an immigration checkpoint.

What a pardon does not cover

The pardon clause does not mention the controlled substance grounds in section 237(a)(2)(B), the firearms grounds in (C), or the domestic violence, stalking and child abuse grounds in (E). It also appears only in the deportability statute. The inadmissibility grounds in section 212(a)(2) contain no matching pardon provision, so a pardon may not solve the problem for someone who must be admitted, for example a person applying for a green card or a resident returning from a long trip.

A pardon is also different from a vacatur, sealing or expungement. Those remedies are covered in our guide to expungement and sentence modifications and in our Matter of Pickering guide.

The New York example: Genalo v. Black

In Genalo v. Black, No. 25-886, the Supreme Court agreed on June 15, 2026 to review a Second Circuit decision about people held under the mandatory detention statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c), and whether a long detention entitles them to a bond hearing. The case was set for argument on October 13, 2026. As SCOTUSblog reported from the docket filings, New York's governor pardoned the remaining respondent for the assault conviction that had led to his detention, and his lawyers argued that he was therefore no longer deportable or subject to section 1226(c). The Solicitor General agreed the case was moot, the parties filed a joint stipulation, and the docket shows the case dismissed under Rule 46 on September 11, 2026.

The underlying question about prolonged detention remains open. According to the same report, the government told the Court it intends to bring the issue back in a new petition.

Practical points for New York and New Jersey

• The statute requires a full and unconditional pardon. A conditional or partial clemency grant may not qualify.
• Check which clause of section 237(a)(2) the conviction falls under before investing in a pardon application. Drug and firearms convictions are not covered.
• Green card holders should review how permanent residents become deportable and keep certified copies of the pardon with their immigration papers.
• A pardon does not erase the conviction from DHS records automatically; it must be presented in the immigration case.
• Detention questions are separate; see the pending Supreme Court case on mandatory detention.

When the paperwork stalls

If a pardon resolves deportability but a later USCIS application sits undecided, federal court practice varies by district. For New York residents, how delay cases are evaluated in the Eastern District of New York is a useful starting point.

Related Guides on This Site

See also New Jersey Post-Conviction Relief Petitions for Immigrants. See also Immigration-Safe Plea Agreements in New York and New Jersey. See also Padilla v. Kentucky: Your Right to Immigration Advice Before a Guilty Plea.

Disclosure: Criminal Immigration Law collaborates with the law firm that publishes Mandamus.com and N600K.com; some articles link to their guides. General information only, not legal advice.