The U.S. Supreme Court sided with the administration of President Donald Trump in a case concerning government authority over green card holders, delivering a major blow to procedural protections for legal immigrants.
The ruling on June 18 (local time), with a 6-3 majority, held that suspicion of a crime alone is sufficient to justify border officials detaining green card holders and placing them in immigration limbo upon reentry.
The case originated with Muk Choi Lau, a lawful permanent resident. He was detained by an immigration officer upon returning to the U.S. from a trip to China in 2012, based on allegations of selling counterfeit goods. At the time, Mr. Lau had not been convicted. He argued the border officer exceeded his authority.
Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, stated: “Border officials are not required to produce clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Lau committed a crime involving moral turpitude.”
In dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by two other liberal justices, expressed concern that the ruling would weaken procedural safeguards for non-citizens with legal status. She warned that the decision could cause many to fall into immigration limbo before conviction. “I fear the Court just handed the Government a blank check of enormous dimensions,” Jackson wrote.
The Trump administration argued that suspicion of a crime is sufficient grounds to strip a green card holder of permanent resident status and place them in immigration proceedings. This is part of a broader push to narrow legal protections for immigrants and expand the government's removal powers.
