Green Card Holders With Criminal Issues Should Think Twice Before Traveling Abroad: New U.S. Supreme Court Decision Changes the Risk Analysis

For many lawful permanent residents, international travel is a routine part of life. Visiting family members overseas, attending weddings and funerals, conducting business, or simply taking a vacation are activities that most Green Card holders understandably expect to do without significant immigration consequences. However, a recent decision by the United States Supreme Court serves as an important reminder that international travel can create unexpected immigration risks for permanent residents who have criminal issues in their background.

On June 23, 2026, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Blanche v. Lau, a case involving a lawful permanent resident who traveled outside the United States while facing a pending criminal charge. Although the decision is highly technical, its practical impact may be significant for Green Card holders with criminal arrests, pending charges, or certain criminal convictions.

What Happened in the Case?

The individual in the case was a lawful permanent resident who had been charged with trademark counterfeiting in New Jersey. Before the criminal case was resolved, he traveled abroad and later attempted to return to the United States. Normally, lawful permanent residents returning from a temporary trip overseas are treated as individuals who have already been admitted to the United States. In most situations, they simply present their Green Card and are allowed to reenter the country. However, immigration law contains several exceptions to this general rule. One of those exceptions applies when a lawful permanent resident has committed certain types of criminal offenses. When the individual in this case attempted to return to the United States, immigration officials did not treat him as a returning resident who was automatically entitled to reenter. Instead, they treated him as an applicant for admission and allowed him to enter the country on parole while his criminal case remained pending. After he later pleaded guilty, the government placed him into removal proceedings.

What Did the Supreme Court Decide?

The primary issue before the Supreme Court was whether immigration officers at the border needed “clear and convincing evidence” that the person had committed a crime before treating him as an applicant for admission. The Supreme Court answered that question “no.” The Court held that immigration officers do not need that heightened level of proof at the time the individual seeks reentry into the United States. Instead, the government may later rely upon evidence developed during removal proceedings, including a subsequent conviction, to support its position that the person fell within the criminal exception. In practical terms, the decision gives immigration authorities greater flexibility when dealing with returning Green Card holders who have pending criminal matters.

Why Does This Matter?

The most important lesson from this decision is that immigration consequences are not limited to convictions. Many permanent residents understand that a criminal conviction can create immigration problems. What is less obvious is that travel itself can become risky when criminal charges are pending or when there are unresolved allegations involving conduct that immigration authorities may view as a crime involving moral turpitude. As a result of this decision, lawful permanent residents with pending criminal cases may face greater scrutiny when returning from international travel. In some situations, they may be placed into removal proceedings even though the criminal case was not resolved at the time they left the country.

Who Should Be Concerned?

This decision is particularly important for Green Card holders who have:

• Pending criminal charges;
• Recent arrests;
• Plea negotiations that have not yet been finalized;
• Diversion or deferred prosecution agreements;
• Criminal convictions involving fraud, theft, dishonesty, or other offenses that may be considered crimes involving moral turpitude; or
• Prior criminal matters that have not been carefully reviewed by an immigration attorney.

In many cases, the immigration consequences of a criminal matter are not obvious from the face of the criminal court disposition. A result that appears favorable in criminal court may still create serious immigration concerns.

Practical Advice for Green Card Holders

A common mistake I see is when a permanent resident assumes that because they have a Green Card, they can freely travel outside the United States regardless of what is happening in a criminal case. That assumption can be dangerous. Before traveling internationally, any lawful permanent resident with a criminal history, pending charge, recent arrest, or unresolved criminal matter should consult with an experienced immigration attorney. The analysis often requires reviewing police reports, charging documents, plea agreements, court records, and the specific immigration statutes that may apply. A brief consultation before a trip can help identify risks that might otherwise lead to lengthy delays at the airport, removal proceedings, or other serious immigration consequences.

Final Thoughts

The Supreme Court’s decision in Blanche v. Lau does not mean that every Green Card holder with a criminal issue will be removed from the United States. It does, however, reinforce an important reality: international travel can significantly change the immigration consequences of a criminal case. For lawful permanent residents, the safest approach is often to evaluate any criminal matter before leaving the country—not after encountering problems at the airport upon return. If you are a Green Card holder and have concerns about a criminal charge, arrest, conviction, or upcoming international travel, it is wise to seek immigration advice before making travel plans.

Schedule a Consultation

If you have questions about how a criminal arrest, conviction, or pending criminal case may affect your immigration status, contact the Law Offices of Sean D. Hummel. We regularly advise lawful permanent residents regarding travel risks, naturalization eligibility, removal issues, and the immigration consequences of criminal matters.

Disclaimer

This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every immigration case is unique. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. Individuals should consult qualified legal counsel regarding their specific circumstances.

About the Author

Sean D. Hummel is a Florida immigration attorney based in Deerfield Beach, Florida. His practice focuses on family-based immigration, adjustment of status, waivers, naturalization, and removal-related matters. He represents clients before USCIS, the Department of State, and the Immigration Courts throughout the United States.