--- name: immigration-fact-check description: > Use this skill to verify citations and consistency of any immigration draft (brief, motion, declaration, USCIS letter, BIA appeal, petition for review). Triggers: "verify this immigration citation", "is this INA cite right", "INA vs USC", "check my immigration brief", "fact check", "is this BIA case real", "cite-check", "8 CFR 208 or 1208", "DHS or EOIR regulation", "FAM cite", "check hallucinations", "consistency check", "audit this filing", "A-number consistent". Four passes: (1) citation verification — INA/USC/CFR/FAM/I&N Dec./circuit cites resolve to real sources; (2) internal consistency — dates, A-number, names, cross-refs; (3) packet consistency — caption, A-number across documents; (4) sworn-vs-argued consistency — brief facts don't contradict declarations. Flags: INA-vs-8-U.S.C. mismatch, DHS-vs-EOIR duplication, FAM-is-guidance-not-law. **Verification only** — never rewrites. version: 0.1.2 --- # Fact-Check an Immigration Filing The fastest way to lose credibility before an immigration judge, the Board, a USCIS officer, or a circuit panel is to cite a provision that doesn't exist, confuse the INA section with the 8 U.S.C. section, cite the DHS regulation when the EOIR one governs, or file a brief whose facts contradict the sworn declaration. This skill runs a four-pass check and produces a human-reviewable **verification report**. > **NOT LEGAL ADVICE.** Fact-checking verifies the surface — it does not tell > the user whether the underlying legal position is sound, nor whether a cited > case is still good law on the facts. Immigration consequences are severe and > often irreversible; pair this with substantive review by a licensed > immigration attorney or an EOIR-accredited representative. > **Never silently rewrite.** This skill flags issues; the user (and, as > needed, the drafting skills) fix them. Silent edits to citations or facts are > how hallucinations get filed. ## Inputs to gather 1. **Scope** — a single document, or the whole packet? 2. **Path(s)** — absolute paths to each file. 3. **Forum** — USCIS, EOIR immigration court, BIA, circuit, or consular. The forum decides *which* of the duplicated regulations governs (see traps). 4. **Intended filing date** — for catching post-snapshot amendments. ## Pass 1 — Citation verification Parse the document for every citation type — **INA** (`INA § 240`), **U.S. Code** (`8 U.S.C. § 1229a`), **CFR** (Title 8 **and** 22), **FAM** (`9 FAM`), **BIA/AG precedent** (`28 I&N Dec. 199`), and **circuit / Supreme Court** (`F.3d` / `U.S.`) — then verify each resolves to a real source that supports the stated proposition. ### 1a. INA ↔ 8 U.S.C. cross-check (the #1 trap) For **every** statutory cite, verify *both* the INA number and the 8 U.S.C. number against the crosswalk in [`../../references/immigration-statutes/README.md`](../../references/immigration-statutes/README.md). The offset is **not constant** — never compute it. The common right answers: INA § 240 = 8 U.S.C. § 1229a; INA § 212 = 8 U.S.C. § 1182; INA § 245 = 8 U.S.C. § 1255; INA § 208 = 8 U.S.C. § 1158; INA § 242 = 8 U.S.C. § 1252. A brief that says "INA § 240 (8 U.S.C. § 1182)" is **mismatched** — flag it. Confirm the verbatim text in the matching [`../../references/immigration-statutes/`](../../references/immigration-statutes/) subchapter file actually says what the draft claims. ### 1b. CFR cross-check against the regulation corpus Resolve each CFR cite against the file in [`../../references/immigration-regulations/`](../../references/immigration-regulations/) (e.g., `8CFR-1240-removal-eoir.md`, `22CFR-042-immigrant-visas.md`). Confirm the part/section exists and supports the proposition. ### 1c. Case-law verification (CourtListener) Case law is **not** snapshotted — verify on demand per [`../../references/legal-data-apis.md`](../../references/legal-data-apis.md). Use the **bundled CourtListener MCP server** (declared in this plugin's `.mcp.json`; if its tools are absent, have the user run `/mcp` to sign in) — the citation-lookup / search tools, per the `immigration-case-law` skill — to confirm a **circuit** opinion is real and says what the draft claims — watch for circuit misattribution (the Ninth Circuit `ca9` has the largest immigration docket). **BIA precedent** is cited **"I&N Dec."** (e.g., *Matter of A-B-*, 28 I&N Dec. 199 (BIA 2021)) — EOIR's Virtual Law Library is the publisher of record and CourtListener indexes many; confirm the precedent has not been certified/overruled by the Attorney General. Flag each cite **RED** (does not resolve — possible hallucination), **YELLOW** (resolves but does not support the proposition / overstates it), **ORANGE** (resolves and supports, but the provision was amended since the quoted version), or **GREEN** (resolves, supports, current). ## The three immigration citation traps - **INA-vs-8-U.S.C. mismatch.** See Pass 1a. Verify both numbers; never assume a constant offset. - **DHS-vs-EOIR regulation duplication.** Several regulations exist in **two parallel versions** — the DHS copy and the EOIR copy — and the draft must cite the one that governs its forum: | Subject | DHS (USCIS / CBP / ICE) | EOIR (court / BIA) | |---|---|---| | Asylum | 8 CFR Part **208** | 8 CFR Part **1208** | | Removal proceedings | 8 CFR Part **240** | 8 CFR Part **1240** | | EOIR / BIA procedure | — | 8 CFR Part **1003** | A removal-defense brief filed in immigration court that cites "8 CFR § 208.13" (DHS) instead of "8 CFR § 1208.13" (EOIR) is citing the wrong sovereign's rule — flag it **YELLOW** and point to the forum-correct part in the regulation corpus. - **FAM is guidance, not law.** A `9 FAM` / `8 FAM` / `7 FAM` cite is **State Department internal guidance**, not binding authority. Never let a FAM cite stand alone — flag any FAM cite that is not paired with the controlling **INA / 8 CFR / 22 CFR** provision, and verify the FAM text against [`../../references/foreign-affairs-manual/`](../../references/foreign-affairs-manual/). ## Pass 2 — Internal consistency Within a single document, verify: - **A-number** (`A2NN-NNN-NNN`) is identical every time it appears, and matches the NTA / receipt notice. A drifting A-number is a blocker. - **Receipt numbers** (`XYZ` + 10 digits), **priority dates**, and **A-file** references are consistent. - **Dates** agree (date of entry, NTA service date, hearing date, deadline math). A "30 days from service" claim should compute correctly. - **Party / declarant names** and **country of nationality** are styled consistently throughout. - **Paragraph and exhibit cross-references** ("as stated in ¶ 12") actually point where they claim. ## Pass 3 — Packet consistency Across every document in the filing (brief, motion, declaration, exhibit index, proposed order, certificate of service): - **Caption** — identical forum/court, A-number, and party names on every page. - **Cross-referenced facts** — the brief's fact recitation matches the declaration's sworn content; exhibits cited in the brief match the exhibit index. - **Relief requested** — the motion's prayer matches the proposed order. - **Service** — the certificate lists every party (and, in EOIR matters, DHS / the ICE Office of the Principal Legal Advisor). ## Pass 4 — Sworn-vs.-argued consistency The brief contains **arguments**; the declaration / affidavit contains **sworn facts**. Verify: - Every factual assertion in the brief has a sworn source (declaration ¶ or exhibit) — flag unsupported assertions. - No argument contradicts a sworn statement (e.g., brief says "entered in 2019"; declaration swears "2018"). - Each declarant attests only within personal knowledge; flag hearsay. ## Producing the report Output a structured report with a summary count (GREEN / ORANGE / YELLOW / RED + consistency issues), one section per pass with the exact location and suggested fix, and a prioritized fix list tagged **BLOCKER** (hallucinated cite, INA/USC mismatch, wrong-forum regulation, A-number drift, sworn-vs-argued contradiction), **IMPORTANT** (amended text, unpaired FAM cite, internal inconsistency), or **SUGGESTED** (stronger authority available; stylistic drift). Keep it readable — a 2-page report that prioritizes blockers beats a 50-page dump. ## Handling fetch failures If a canonical fetch fails, flag the item **UNVERIFIED (fetch failed)** — distinct from RED (hallucination) — and continue. Report unverified items separately so the user can confirm them manually. Do not silently rewrite. ## Artifacts this skill drafts - A **verification report** (the four-pass output above). - A **citation table** mapping each cite to its INA/USC pair, forum-correct regulation, and verification status. - A **prioritized fix list** (BLOCKER / IMPORTANT / SUGGESTED). ## Related authority - INA ↔ 8 U.S.C. crosswalk — [`../../references/immigration-statutes/README.md`](../../references/immigration-statutes/README.md) and the subchapter text in [`../../references/immigration-statutes/`](../../references/immigration-statutes/). - 8 CFR / 22 CFR text — [`../../references/immigration-regulations/`](../../references/immigration-regulations/) (note the DHS `208`/`240` vs. EOIR `1208`/`1240`/`1003` duplication). - FAM guidance — [`../../references/foreign-affairs-manual/`](../../references/foreign-affairs-manual/). - Case-law lookup (CourtListener / BIA / AAO) — [`../../references/legal-data-apis.md`](../../references/legal-data-apis.md) and [`../../references/online-sources.md`](../../references/online-sources.md). ## Composition Runs after any drafting skill and before filing. Composes with `immigration-pro-se` (orientation), `eoir-removal-defense`, `eoir-motions-to-reopen-reconsider`, `bia-appeals`, `uscis-benefit-requests`, `consular-visa-refusal`, and `circuit-petition-for-review` (re-draft flagged items by handing back to the originating skill), and with `immigration-deadlines` (to confirm any deadline math the draft asserts).