Yesterday
morning, the Supreme Court issued an important decision,Vartelas v. Holder, No. 10-1211,
rejecting the retroactive application of a provision of a law passed by
Congress in 1996 that has prevented many lawful permanent residents (LPRs) from
returning to the United
States after a trip abroad. Citing the
«deeply rooted presumption» against applying new laws retroactively,
the Court ruled 6-3 that LPRs who temporarily leave the country cannot be
denied readmission on account of criminal convictions that occurred before the
law took effect.
The Justice Department argued that LPRs with certain criminal convictions may
be barred from re-entering the United States any time they leave the
country—even if the law in effect at the time of their guilty pleas did not
make them eligible for deportation or ineligible for reentry to the United
States. The Supreme Court properly rejected this argument, noting that the
government’s interpretation effectively prevented such LPRs from ever leaving
the country.
The following is a statement from Benjamin Johnson, Executive Director of the
American Immigration Council:
“The Supreme Court’s decision properly recognizes that legal immigrants should
not be subjected to penalties that did not exist at the time they entered a
criminal plea. The government’s argument that green card holders who pled
guilty to crimes prior to 1997 could avoid the adverse consequences of the law
by simply staying home makes no sense. As Justice Ginsburg noted in the
majority opinion, loss of the ability to travel abroad could prevent such
individuals from fulfilling religious obligations or responding to family
emergencies. The Supreme Court’s ruling affirms the well-established principle
that the government cannot change the rules in the middle of the game.”
