{"argument_date":"2026-04-22T00:00:00Z","arguments":[{"argument_date":"2026-04-22T00:00:00Z","heading":"What happened at the argument","official_detail_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2025/25-429","official_transcript_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","paragraphs":["The government's lawyer conceded the proof standard is not in the statute. He conceded no constitutional right favors deportable treatment. He acknowledged the standard usually fails at the border. He answered that parole does not alter lawful permanent resident status.","Mr. Lau's lawyer requested affirmance on a narrow ground or dismissal. The government's lawyer disputed the characterization of its parole position. He answered that a determination precedes parole eligibility but rests on less proof. A justice's question is not a vote, and oral argument is not a decision.","The government's side tested whether proof duties apply at the border or only later in removal proceedings. Mr. Lau's side tested whether parole can come before an admissibility determination."],"reargument":false,"sequence":1,"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 1-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 1, lines 1-9"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 49-53","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 11, lines 49-53"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 19-27","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 16, lines 19-27"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 23-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 18, lines 23-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 49-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 30, lines 49-9"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 55-35","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 37, lines 55-35"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 40, lines 7-19"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 42, lines 29-41","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 42, lines 29-41"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 31-39","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 56, lines 31-39"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 17-35","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 59, lines 17-35"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 6, lines 35-9"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 11-21","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 69, lines 11-21"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 43-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 73, lines 43-9"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 35-47","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 74, lines 35-47"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 35-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 98, lines 35-43"}]}],"caption":"Blanche, Acting Atty Gen. v. Lau","case_history":[{"changed_at":"2026-08-28T20:28:59.603023Z","explanation":"An official oral-argument transcript was verified.","status":"argued"},{"changed_at":"2026-08-28T20:28:59.724590Z","explanation":"An official oral-argument transcript was verified.","status":"argued"},{"changed_at":"2026-08-29T23:58:16.821138Z","explanation":"An official Court opinion was verified.","status":"decided"},{"changed_at":"2026-08-30T01:35:38.930215Z","explanation":"An official Court opinion was verified.","status":"decided"}],"case_status":"decided","dek":"A green card holder challenges his removal, arguing the government must prove he was seeking admission before it can parole him. The government says it can meet that proof duty later, in the removal proceeding.","dek_sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 23-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 18, lines 23-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 40, lines 7-19"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 11-21","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 69, lines 11-21"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 35-47","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 74, lines 35-47"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 35-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 98, lines 35-43"}],"dispositions":[],"latest_court_document_date":"2026-04-22T00:00:00Z","maturity":"post_opinion","official_detail_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2025/25-429","official_disposition_urls":["https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-429_h3ci.pdf"],"official_docket_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/25-429.html","primary_docket":"25-429","revisions":[{"correction_note":null,"created_at":"2026-08-29T03:39:12.978901Z","maturity":"official_transcript","revision_number":1},{"correction_note":"Removed internal claim markers from public prose.","created_at":"2026-08-29T11:39:02.613015Z","maturity":"official_transcript","revision_number":2},{"correction_note":"Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.","created_at":"2026-08-29T16:28:06.714269Z","maturity":"official_transcript","revision_number":3},{"correction_note":"Removed an unsupported statement that the Court had not ruled; the available source set did not establish that absence.","created_at":"2026-08-29T23:48:24.741967Z","maturity":"official_transcript","revision_number":4},{"correction_note":"Corrected unsupported no-ruling language and clarified that the article's disposition summary is incomplete.","created_at":"2026-08-30T00:16:28.933599Z","maturity":"official_transcript","revision_number":5},{"correction_note":"Added the holding and disposition from the verified official Court opinion.","created_at":"2026-08-30T01:46:30.733515Z","maturity":"post_opinion","revision_number":6},{"correction_note":"Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.","created_at":"2026-09-05T03:22:24Z","maturity":"post_opinion","revision_number":7}],"schema_version":"1.1","sections":[{"heading":"What this case is about","paragraphs":["This case involves a lawful permanent resident facing removal. The dispute is over which legal category applies to him and how strong the government's proof must be. One category, inadmissibility, applies at the border. The other, deportability, applies to people already living here lawfully."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 23-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 18, lines 23-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 40, lines 7-19"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 11-21","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 69, lines 11-21"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 35-47","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 74, lines 35-47"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 35-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 98, lines 35-43"}]},{"heading":"How the case got here","paragraphs":["The case reached the Supreme Court after earlier rounds of proceedings below. Sopan Joshi argued for the federal government. Shay Dvoretzky argued for Mr. Lau."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 1-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 1, lines 1-9"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 17-35","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 59, lines 17-35"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 43-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 73, lines 43-9"}]},{"heading":"What each side wants","paragraphs":["Mr. Lau asks the Court to affirm on a narrow timing point or to dismiss the case without deciding it. He argues the government cannot parole a green card holder before deciding whether an admissibility exception applies.","The government asks the Court to rule that it met its proof duty in the removal proceeding. It argues there is no evidentiary requirement at the border, so it may prove the case later."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 23-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 18, lines 23-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 40, lines 7-19"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 17-35","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 59, lines 17-35"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 11-21","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 69, lines 11-21"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 43-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 73, lines 43-9"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 35-47","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 74, lines 35-47"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 35-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 98, lines 35-43"}]},{"heading":"What each side says","paragraphs":["The government's lawyer conceded the clear-and-convincing proof standard does not come from the immigration statute. It comes from a Board decision, which the government accepts here. He also said no proof standard is prescribed at the border. If one is needed, it should be a simple satisfaction-of-the-officer test.","The government's lawyer said the border officer relied on a federal database showing an arrest and a pending charge. He argued the government must prove, and did prove, by clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Lau was seeking admission at the relevant time. He conceded there is no constitutional right to be treated as deportable rather than inadmissible."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 23-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 18, lines 23-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 40, lines 7-19"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 17-35","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 59, lines 17-35"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 11-21","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 69, lines 11-21"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 43-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 73, lines 43-9"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 35-47","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 74, lines 35-47"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 35-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 98, lines 35-43"}]},{"heading":"What the justices asked","paragraphs":["The government's side tested whether proof duties apply at the border or only later in removal proceedings. Mr. Lau's side tested whether parole can come before an admissibility determination."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 1, lines 1-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 1, lines 1-9"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 49-53","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 11, lines 49-53"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 19-27","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 16, lines 19-27"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 23-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 18, lines 23-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 49-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 30, lines 49-9"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 55-35","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 37, lines 55-35"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 40, lines 7-19"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 42, lines 29-41","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 42, lines 29-41"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 31-39","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 56, lines 31-39"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 17-35","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 59, lines 17-35"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 6, lines 35-9"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 11-21","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 69, lines 11-21"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 43-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 73, lines 43-9"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 35-47","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 74, lines 35-47"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 35-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 98, lines 35-43"}]},{"heading":"Why it matters","paragraphs":["The proof standard matters because clear and convincing proof is very hard to meet. The government's own lawyer admitted that standard usually cannot be met at the border itself. So the timing question decides where and when the government must build its case. Mr."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 23-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 18, lines 23-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 40, lines 7-19"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 11-21","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 69, lines 11-21"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 35-47","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 74, lines 35-47"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 35-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 98, lines 35-43"}]},{"heading":"What the Court decided","paragraphs":["Border officers need not meet the clear-and-convincing evidence standard before treating a returning permanent resident as seeking admission after committing a crime. Later conviction timing does not change that rule.","The Court vacated the Second Circuit's judgment and sent the case back for further proceedings."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Opinion","label":"Official Supreme Court Opinion — file page 2, lines 1-1","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-429_h3ci.pdf","page_label":"file page 2, lines 1-1"},{"evidence_type":"Opinion","label":"Official Supreme Court Opinion — file page 3, lines 1-1","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-429_h3ci.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 1-1"}]}],"slug":"2025-25-429-blanche-acting-atty-gen-v-lau","term":"2025","title":"Must the Government Prove a Green Card Holder Was Seeking Admission Before Paroling Him at the Border?","title_sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 23-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 18, lines 23-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 40, lines 7-19"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 11-21","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 69, lines 11-21"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 35-47","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 74, lines 35-47"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 98, lines 35-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2025/25-429_3ea4.pdf","page_label":"file page 98, lines 35-43"}],"topics":[],"undated_disposition_date_fallback":"latest_argument_date","updated_at":"2026-09-05T03:22:24Z"}