Supreme Court Rules for Trump Administration in Immigration Case

Major Supreme Court ruling for Green Card holders accused of any wrongdoing.

The Supreme Court handed the Trump administration a major victory in an immigration case as it said that the administration is right in taking away Green Cards from people accused of some criminal activities when they come back to the US. The 6-3 decision came in connection with an immigration officer's 2012 decision to put Green Card holder Muk Choi Lau on immigration parole when he returned from a short trip abroad because he had been accused of a counterfeiting crime. Lau argued that the officer overstepped authority, and the decision wrongly allowed the Department of Homeland Security to swiftly begin deportation proceedings after he pleaded guilty to trademark counterfeiting.

What is the case of Lau?

Lau is a Chinese national who became a lawful permanent resident in 2007. Five years later, in May 2012, he was arrested and charged in New Jersey for allegedly selling nearly $300,000 worth of counterfeit goods. He then briefly left the US and returned that June. Immigration officers determined that Lau's pending charge made him inadmissible. He was allowed to stay in the US only temporarily “to face prosecution for his counterfeiting offense.” He pleaded guilty to trademark counterfeiting in 2013, and immigration judges determined he was subject to removal for his conviction. But a federal appeals court later determined that immigration officers needed “clear and convincing evidence” that Lau had actually committed a disqualifying crime — not just charges before a conviction — before deciding he was inadmissible. Today, this ruling was overturned by the Supreme Court and though the case precedes the Trump administration, it empowers border officers to deny a Green Card holder his permanent residency in such cases. Justice Clarence Thomas' decision makes Green Card holders vulnerable for detention and removal even if they are accused of some crime and the allegations are not proved. Border officers do not need “clear and convincing evidence” that a lawful permanent resident in the US has committed a serious crime before changing their status, the verdict said. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson disagreed and that this will give a massive blank check to the government to rewrite immigration law.