Major Change to Advance Parole Rules: Traveling on Advance Parole May Trigger a 3-Year or 10-Year Bar

Applicants with a pending Form I-485 who have already received Advance Parole should pay close attention to an important legal change. Traveling abroad with Advance Parole was once considered relatively safe in many situations. Now, it may expose travelers to a 3-year or 10-year unlawful presence bar.

On August 13, 2026, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) issued a precedential decision in Matter of Delcarmen-Lara, overruling the 2012 decision in Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly. This decision changed the rules that had governed travel on Advance Parole for more than a decade.

Under Arrabally, even if an applicant had accrued unlawful presence in the United States, departing with approved Advance Parole generally did not trigger the 3-year or 10-year unlawful presence bars under INA § 212(a)(9)(B). As a result, many applicants with pending Form I-485 applications relied on Advance Parole for international travel.

The BIA has now adopted a different interpretation. In Matter of Delcarmen-Lara, the BIA held that, under the text of INA § 212(a)(9)(B), leaving the United States with Advance Parole is still a “departure” for purposes of that provision. In other words, although Advance Parole is travel authorization approved by the government, it does not make the departure legally cease to be a departure.

Therefore, if an applicant has accrued enough unlawful presence before leaving the United States, traveling on Advance Parole may trigger a 3-year or 10-year inadmissibility bar. Generally, more than 180 days but less than one year of unlawful presence may trigger a 3-year bar. One year or more may trigger a 10-year bar.

This change is especially important for applicants with a pending Form I-485. If you have experienced a gap in immigration status, remained in the United States after your I-94 expired, or have another history of unlawful presence, you should not assume that “my Advance Parole has been approved, so I can travel without concern.” Approval of Advance Parole does not erase unlawful presence accrued in the past or guarantee that departing the United States will have no immigration consequences.

Of course, not everyone who travels with Advance Parole will trigger a 3-year or 10-year bar. The new rule most directly affects people who have already accrued enough unlawful presence to trigger INA § 212(a)(9)(B) and plan to travel abroad using Advance Parole. Whether you face a risk depends on your individual circumstances, including your I-94 and immigration history and the precise calculation of any unlawful presence.

People who previously traveled on Advance Parole in reliance on Arrabally should also be aware of the new rule’s temporal scope. The BIA stated that Matter of Delcarmen-Lara applies prospectively, rather than automatically applying retroactively to every past trip on Advance Parole. Many applicants made travel decisions in reliance on the then-valid Arrabally precedent, so the new decision should not be assumed to automatically affect every past departure on Advance Parole.

If you are planning to travel using Advance Parole, especially if you have a history of unlawful presence, do not make travel arrangements solely because your Advance Parole has been approved. Before departing, confirm whether you have accrued unlawful presence, how much time has accrued, and whether you may be subject to a 3-year or 10-year inadmissibility bar.

In short, many people once believed that “having Advance Parole meant they could travel abroad safely in many situations.” Now, it is important to review your immigration history first. Advance Parole remains an important travel document, but it no longer means that past unlawful presence will have no consequences.

If you have a pending Form I-485, have received Advance Parole, and have experienced a gap in status or unlawful presence, consult an immigration attorney before traveling to assess the risks in your specific case.

This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice for any individual situation. Immigration laws and related policies may continue to be affected by court proceedings and future government guidance.