FirstAlerts
Crime & Courts

11 Charged in Alleged Nationwide Marriage Fraud Scheme

Federal authorities unsealed an indictment charging 11 individuals with conspiring to orchestrate over 1,000 sham marriages to obtain green cards.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 20, 2026, 5:29 p.m. ET
On August 12, 2026, an official indictment unsealed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York 11 individuals in connection with an alleged decade-long marriage fraud scheme. According to U.S. Department of Justice filings, the network arranged more than 1,000 sham marriages between foreign nationals—primarily citizens of the People’s Republic of China—and U.S. citizens from at least 2016 through July 2026. Official court documents list the defendants as Amy Cheng, Xiao Mei Chan, Christine Lu, Jing Yan Ye, Xiao Yan Chen, Gang Zheng, Anthony Cheng, Michelle Duenas, Angela Duenas, Sigrid Cetino, and Erika Johnson. Department filings state that foreign nationals paid facilitators as much as approximately $100,000 for a sham marriage. Facilitators allegedly paid participating U.S. citizens up to about $30,000 and paid recruiters commissions of up to approximately $5,000 for each citizen recruited. Attorney General Todd Blanche stated that the Department of Justice is working to root out fraud in the immigration system. U.S. Attorney Jamie McDonald for the Southern District of New York said the arrests dismantled a central component of a multimillion-dollar scheme. Acting Executive Associate Director John Condon of Homeland Security Investigations stated that the network caused hundreds of fraudulent green card applications to be submitted to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Each defendant is with one count of conspiracy to commit marriage fraud and immigration fraud, carrying a maximum penalty of five years in prison, and one count of conspiracy to encourage the unlawful residence of aliens in the United States, carrying a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. The case remains undecided at the charging stage; charges are allegations, and all defendants are presumed innocent unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 120 Aug 2026, 21:29current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.