Green Card Holders and the Parole Question
A High-Stakes Case Pits DHS Against Immigrant Rights Advocates
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a pivotal case that could redefine the rights of permanent residents when re-entering the United States after international travel.
The Core Issue: When Can a Green Card Holder Be Placed on Parole?
The case—Blanche v. Lau—centers on whether an immigration officer can downgrade a returning green card holder’s status to parole based on an uncertain criminal charge, rather than a conviction.
- Parole is a temporary allowance allowing entry or stay, even without formal admission.
- It does not revoke a green card but grants the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) time to determine whether to admit or deport the individual.
The Story of Muk Lau: From Trademark Counterfeiting Charge to Deportation Threat
Muk Lau, a 69-year-old Chinese immigrant and five-year U.S. permanent resident, became the test case for this legal battle.
- In June 2012, Lau returned from China, presenting his green card and passport at New York’s JFK Airport.
- A border agent flagged him because, a month earlier, he had been charged with third-degree trademark counterfeiting—selling $300,000 in fake designer shorts.
- The agent declared Lau inadmissible under the “crime exception” and allowed him entry only on parole.
- Lau later pleaded guilty, and in 2014, DHS initiated deportation proceedings.
The Legal Question: How Much Proof Is Enough?
The Supreme Court will determine:
"Did the agent need clear and convincing proof of guilt to place Lau on parole, or was the mere charge sufficient?"
- Immigrant advocates argue:
- A charge alone should not justify parole—Lau was never convicted and should have been admitted normally.
The current standard "burdens border officers" who must make split-second decisions for thousands of travelers daily.
- DHS counters:
- A criminal charge justifies parole, even without a conviction.
- The ruling should not affect green card holders without criminal histories.
Why This Case Could Redefine Permanent Residency Rights
- Nearly 13 million green card holders reside in the U.S., with studies showing lower crime rates than native citizens.
- A ruling in favor of DHS could set a dangerous precedent, allowing immigration officers to parole any returning green card holder with a past charge—even if acquitted.
A Broader Battle in the Supreme Court’s Immigration Docket
This case joins other high-profile immigration disputes before the Court this year, including:
- Birthright citizenship
- Temporary Protected Status (TPS)
The outcome of Blanche v. Lau could reshape how the U.S. treats lawful permanent residents who travel abroad and return—regardless of their legal record.
The stakes? Nothing less than the future of green card protections.
