Ok, so I think this is what you added:
{...
Also, what was this 'past marriage' of her that was fraudulent? The article does not say.
I don't buy her story. It's ultimately ridiculous. The Guardian story is a bunch of B.S.
Also:
"Milne was divorced from the nonimmigrant student she married prior to 1983. She then married a U.S. citizen but we found, in our above-said unpublished opinion, that she had admitted that it was a marriage of convenience. After another divorce, she married her current husband, a marriage that is uncontested as "bona fide." Her request for legal permanent resident status based on this marriage was denied under INA § 204(c) which precludes approval based on even an admittedly good-faith union if the petitioner had previously contracted an improper marriage."
...}
But even if her first marriage was just to become a citizen, that should not alter the second marriage that produced a US citizen child.
Clearly "INA § 204(c)" is not legal.
A previous bogus marriage does not alter the fact government does not have the authority to break up families by deporting a mother from their valid husband and child.
Laws are only valid when necessary to protect others, and this protects no one, but harms all 3 people.