Immigration · Primary-source case analysis

Mellouli v. Lynch: A State Drug Conviction Required a Federal Controlled-Substance Match

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published April 21, 2026

Mellouli applies the categorical approach to the INA’s controlled-substance ground and rejects treating all drug-paraphernalia convictions as federally matched offenses.

A sock and unidentified tablets produced removal proceedings

A lawful permanent resident pleaded guilty under Kansas law to possessing drug paraphernalia after police found pills in his sock. The conviction record did not identify a federally controlled substance.

The state schedules were broader

Kansas controlled at least nine substances not included in the federal schedules incorporated by the INA. The categorical approach compares the statutory offense with the federal definition rather than assuming the actual substance.

Paraphernalia did not justify a looser rule

The Board treated paraphernalia as relating to the drug trade generally. The Court rejected that mismatch because it could make possession of a container more removal-significant than possession of the state-only substance itself.

Disposition

The Court reversed the removal determination. The conviction did not establish the federally defined controlled-substance connection required by section 1227(a)(2)(B)(i).

Key takeaways

• Compare the state and federal drug schedules in effect at the relevant time.
• Review the statute and permitted conviction records for the substance element.
• Do not infer a federal match from a generic drug label.
• Analyze each removability ground separately.