The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that federal border officials can use an indictment or other accusation to temporarily strip green cards from immigrants as they reenter the country. The 6-3 opinion, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, says the officials do not need to have “clear and convincing” evidence of offenses at the time of the decision to suspend the status of a Lawful Permanent Resident. This decision fundamentally reshapes how border officers may treat returning green card holders and will affect your reentry strategy, client travel counseling, and criminal case defense planning.
What changed
The case started when Muk Choi Lau, a green card holder, was indicted on a counterfeiting charge in New Jersey in 2012 and then left the United States. On his return to the United States, immigration officials took away his green card and instead admitted him into the country with the temporary status of parole. Lower courts found that the decision to admit Lau under parole was improper and that immigration officials did not have “clear and convincing” evidence of Lau’s conduct based on the indictment alone.
The Supreme Court reversed an appeals court and sent the case back down to that court for resolution, saying that border officials did not have to meet that standard. “Border officers did not have the burden to establish by clear and convincing evidence that Lau had committed a crime involving moral turpitude,” Thomas wrote.
The ruling eliminates the evidentiary floor that the Second Circuit had imposed and leaves no clear standard for how much evidence an officer must have—only that a mere indictment or accusation suffices.
Why it matters
You must now advise clients with pending criminal charges very differently. Under federal immigration law, green card holders are presumed to be able to reenter the country, but there are certain exceptions, such as when the immigrant has “committed” certain offenses, or admits to doing so, within five years of receiving the green card. That presumption in favor of entry is now hollow at the border.
Any client with a green card who faces a criminal indictment—even an unproven one—now risks immediate reclassification to parole status upon return from travel. Green card holders are now forced to prove they are legally entitled to remain in the U.S., rather than requiring the government to prove they should be removed. Once reclassified to parole, they become vulnerable to mandatory detention, loss of work authorization, and expedited deportation proceedings.
The practical trap: a client may not know an indictment or accusation is in the system, discover it only at a port of entry, and face immediate parole placement. An individual facing parole might spend years in legal limbo or in detention, even if eventually acquitted of the underlying charge.
Way forward
-
Advise clients with pending charges not to travel. Query whether your client is listed in criminal databases before any international trip. Consult with criminal counsel about the state of any charges.
-
Brief clients on parole consequences. If a client is placed on parole, explain that parole is not a green card—it carries no work authorization, requires reporting, and subjects them to detention. Immediate legal review is critical.
-
Preserve reentry arguments. If your client is reclassified to parole at the border, quickly file a motion to reconsider or appeal the classification decision; the lower courts may still find the parole order unlawful on remand, though the bar is now much higher.
-
Criminal defense coordination. Work closely with criminal counsel to resolve pending charges before any border crossing. A guilty plea to a crime of moral turpitude within five years of receiving the green card will trigger removability; an acquittal will not.
Disclaimer
This article summarizes a published court decision and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration and criminal law are complex, and this ruling does not address every scenario. You must consult a licensed immigration attorney and review the full opinion before advising any client on reentry risk. Policy and case law can change without notice; verify all information against the primary sources linked above and current authoritative guidance from USCIS and EOIR.