Просмотр новости
Найдите то, что Вас интересует
Спутники
РН
SpaceX
Роскосмос
NASA
СпутникиРНSpaceXРоскосмосNASASupreme Court Holds LPRs with Pending Criminal Charges May Be Deemed Applicants for Admission When Re-Entering the United States: Blanche v. Lau
Crimes
Detention
Removal Defense
ddelacruz
Tue, 07/14/2026 - 13:22
Publication Date
Jul 14, 2026
Share
On June 23, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision in Blanche v. Lau, in which it held that a border officer can determine that a lawful permanent resident (LPR) returning to the United States after a trip abroad is an applicant for admission based on the commission of a crime, even without clear and convincing evidence to support that finding. Mr. Lau, an LPR, traveled abroad while a criminal charge was pending against him for a potential crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT). Even though no conviction had occurred when Mr. Lau sought re-entry, the Court found that border agents could deem him an applicant seeking an admission, and then use a later conviction to charge him in removal proceedings as an inadmissible noncitizen. This advisory summarizes the majority and dissent’s opinions, and shares key takeaways and practice tips for criminal defenders and immigration practitioners in light of the decision.
Downloads
File
Blanche v. Lau Practice Advisory.pdf
Audience
Practitioners
On June 23, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision in Blanche v. Lau, in which it held that a border officer can determine that a lawful permanent resident (LPR) returning to the United States after a trip abroad is an applicant for admission based on the commission of a crime, even without clear and convincing evidence to support that finding. Mr. Lau, an LPR, traveled abroad while a criminal charge was pending against him for a potential crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT). Even though no conviction had occurred when Mr. Lau sought re-entry, the Court found that border agents could deem him an applicant seeking an admission, and then use a later conviction to charge him in removal proceedings as an inadmissible noncitizen. This advisory summarizes the majority and dissent’s opinions, and shares key takeaways and practice tips for criminal defenders and immigration practitioners in light of the decision.
| # | Наименование новости | Тональность | Информативность | Дата публикации |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | New BIA Procedural Rules: What's in Effect and What's Not | 0 | 14.34 | 26-06-2026 |
| 2 | Ninth Circuit Rules on Due Diligence Standard for Equitable Tolling For Motions to Reopen | 0 | 12.28 | 14-07-2026 |
| 3 | Immigration Consequences of Prop 36 and Other New California Offenses Part Two: Property Crime Offenses | 0 | 13.87 | 30-06-2026 |
| 4 | Comment Opposing Proposed Changes to the Board of Immigration Appeals | 0 | 14.92 | 07-08-2026 |
| 5 | ILRC Comment Opposing Interim Final Rule regarding Signatures for Immigration Benefit Requests | 0 | 14.54 | 09-07-2026 |
| 6 | ILRC Comment Opposing Fee Increase for Individuals Removed in Absentia | 0 | 13.33 | 24-06-2026 |
| 7 | ILRC Comment Opposing the Proposed Rule Limiting Work Authorization for Asylum Seekers | 0 | 13.2 | 28-04-2026 |
| 8 | Supreme Court upholds birthright citizenship | 0 | 35.4 | 30-06-2026 |
| 9 | ILRC Comment Opposing Form EOIR-33 Proposed Changes | 0 | 14.54 | 05-05-2026 |
| 10 | She pleaded guilty to a drug charge. Then she visited Mexico not knowing she couldn’t return | 0 | 19.59 | 13-08-2026 |