NEW YORK, Aug. 13 (DC Times Online) — Federal prosecutors have charged 11 people in Manhattan with allegedly arranging more than 1,000 sham marriages over more than a decade to help Chinese nationals seek U.S. immigration benefits.
The U.S. Department of Justice announced the unsealing of a two-count indictment on Aug. 12, 2026, after arrests in the case. The announcement and a news conference by Attorney General Todd Blanche took place in Washington, D.C. The prosecution was brought in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
The defendants are 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. The indictment charges each with conspiracy to commit marriage fraud and immigration fraud, as well as conspiracy to encourage the unlawful residence of aliens in the United States. The defendants have been accused, not convicted, and the available records do not show their pleas or whether they have issued responses through attorneys.
What prosecutors allege
According to the Justice Department’s description of the indictment, the alleged network operated from at least 2016 through July 2026. It was based mainly in New York City but allegedly arranged marriages in several states and overseas, including Connecticut, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, China and Vanuatu.
Prosecutors allege that foreign nationals paid facilitators as much as about $100,000 for a sham marriage and help seeking lawful permanent resident status, commonly called a green card. U.S. citizens who agreed to participate allegedly received as much as about $30,000, usually in payments tied to stages of a green-card application. Recruiters allegedly received up to about $5,000 for each U.S. citizen they recruited.
The indictment alleges that the network submitted at least hundreds of fraudulent green-card applications and supporting documents to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Prosecutors said they believe the operation collected tens of millions of dollars from foreign nationals seeking permanent resident status.
The Justice Department also described allegations that participants used advertising and social media to find people, staged wedding photographs or ceremonies, and created records such as joint accounts to make marriages appear genuine. The indictment further alleges that participants prepared or coached people for immigration proceedings.
Why the charges matter
A marriage entered into for the purpose of evading U.S. immigration law can be prosecuted as marriage fraud. Immigration applications that rely on false claims or documents can lead to additional fraud charges.
The first conspiracy count carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison if a defendant is convicted. The second carries a maximum sentence of 10 years. Those are statutory maximums, not predicted sentences, and any punishment would depend on a conviction and the facts established in court.
Blanche called the case “one of the largest marriage fraud schemes charged in United States history.” The Justice Department did not provide a comparison or official ranking showing how the case compares with every previous prosecution.
U.S. Attorney Jamie McDonald, whose office is prosecuting the case, said the defendants and others allegedly ran a “nationwide and international, multimillion-dollar marriage fraud scheme” that used participants to profit from U.S. immigration laws.
What remains unclear
The government’s announcement does not establish how many of the more than 1,000 marriages resulted in approved green cards. It also does not say how many participants remain unidentified or uncharged.
The available materials do not include the case number, assigned judge, individual arrest records or arraignment outcomes. They also do not show whether any charges have been dismissed or resolved. Those matters will be addressed through the federal court proceedings.
The alleged activity was principally based in New York, while the federal announcement was made in Washington. The supplied records do not identify a specific Washington defendant, marriage or alleged act.
