(B)  Safe Havens.  Once the government has officially acknowledged the lawfulness of an entry or admission by a grant of registry,[1405] by a waiver of inadmissibility,[1406] or in some other manner, the government cannot collaterally question the decision in removal proceedings. The entry or admission is regarded as lawful until the grant of relief is rescinded in some appropriate manner.[1407]

[1405] Matter of V, 7 I. & N. Dec. 363 (BIA 1956).

[1406] Matter of GA, 7 I. & N. Dec. 274 (BIA 1956).

[1407] See C. Gordon, S. Mailman, & S. Yale-Loehr, Immigration Law and Procedure § 51.06[4] (rescission) (2004).

Second Circuit

INADMISSIBILITY BASED UPON AN ADMISSION - ADMISSIONS INSUFFICIENT PRE-1990
Francis v. Gonzalez, __ F.3d __, 2006 WL 768549 (2d Cir. Mar. 27, 2006) (government failed to show noncitizen deportable for being inadmissible at entry or adjustment, under INA 237(a)(1)(A), on the basis that he admitted commission of a controlled substances offense, under current INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(II), since this ground of inadmissibility was not triggered by an admission of commission of the offense until IMMACT 1990, effective November 29, 1990, and noncitizen adjusted status prior to that date).

DEPORTABLE BECAUSE INADMISSIBLE AT TIME OF ENTRY OR ADJUSTMENT - COURT MUST LOOK AT LAW AS IT EXISTED AT TIME OF ENTRY/ADJUSTMENT
Francis v. Gonzalez, __ F.3d __, 2006 WL 768549 (2d Cir. Mar. 27, 2006) (to determine whether a noncitizen is deportable for being inadmissible at entry or adjustment under INA 237(a)(1)(A), the court must look to the law as it existed at the time of entry or adjustment, not current law).