Grand Supreme Court ruling for green card holders accused of any wrongdoing.
The Supreme Court handed the Trump administration a major victory in the immigration case, saying the administration was right to revoke green cards from people accused of certain criminal activity when they return to the United States.
The 6-3 decision came in relation to an immigration officer’s decision in 2012 to place green card holder Mok Chuy Lau on immigration parole when he returned from a short trip abroad because he had been accused of committing fraud.Lau argued that the officer exceeded his authority, and that the decision wrongly allowed the Department of Homeland Security to quickly begin deportation proceedings after he pleaded guilty to trademark counterfeiting.
What is Lao status?
Lau is a Chinese citizen who became a lawful permanent resident in 2007. Five years later, in May 2012, he was arrested and charged in New Jersey for selling nearly $300,000 in counterfeit goods. He then left the United States briefly and returned in June of that year. Immigration officers decided that the charge against Lau made him inadmissible.He was only allowed to remain in the United States temporarily “to face prosecution for counterfeiting.”
He pleaded guilty to trademark counterfeiting in 2013, and immigration judges decided he was vulnerable to deportation because of his conviction.But a federal appeals court later decided that immigration officials needed “clear and convincing evidence” that Lau actually committed the disqualifying crime — not just the pre-conviction charges — before deciding not to accept him.Today, the Supreme Court overturned that ruling, and although this case predates the Trump administration, it enables border officers to deny a green card holder their permanent residence in such cases.Judge Clarence Thomas’ decision makes green card holders vulnerable to detention and deportation even if they are accused of committing certain crimes and the allegations have not been proven. The ruling said border agents do not need “clear and convincing evidence” that a lawful permanent resident of the United States has committed a serious crime before changing their status.Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson disagreed that this would give a big blank check to the government to rewrite immigration law.
