Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Todd Blanche, Acting Attorney General v. Muk Choi Lau

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, No. 21-6623 · judgment March 4, 2025


Decided · June 23, 2026
Pre-decision estimate: 25% cert probability (95% interval 17%–34%)

Before the decision, about 6× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a federal-government petitioner, counsel who has won certiorari before, and a Second Circuit decision below.

Question presented

Under 8 U.S.C. 1182(a), various categories of aliens, including those who have committed or been convicted of certain crimes, are "ineligible to be admitted to the United States" and subject to removal. 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2); see 8 U.S.C. 1229a. Under 8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(13)(C), a lawful permanent resident (LPR) who is returning to the United States after a trip abroad is generally not "regarded as seeking an admission into the United States" and is therefore not typically subject to the inadmissibility grounds in Section 1182(a). But that general rule does not apply to an LPR who "has committed an offense identified in section 1182 (a)(2)"­ i.e., an offense that would render him inadmissible. 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(13)(C)(v). The question presented is: Whether, to remove an LPR who committed an offense listed in Section 1182(a)(2) and was subsequently paroled into the United States, the government must prove that it possessed clear and convincing evidence of the offense at the time of the LPR's last reentry into the United States.

Counsel of record

For petitioner
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General

For respondent
Shay Dvoretzky
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Amicus briefs
4 merits
(1 supporting pet./neither, 3 respondent)

Argument & decision

Argued April 22, 2026 — Sopan Joshi · Shay Dvoretzky. Audio and transcript

Decided June 23, 2026. Opinion by Thomas.

Proceedings

  1. Jul 27 2026
    Judgment Issued.
  2. Jun 23 2026
    Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Thomas, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined. Jackson, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Sotomayor and Kagan, JJ., joined.
  3. Apr 22 2026
    Argued. For petitioner: Sopan Joshi, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Shay Dvoretzky, Washington, D. C.
  4. Apr 10 2026
    Reply of petitioner filed. (Distributed)
  5. Mar 30 2026
    CIRCULATED
  6. Mar 27 2026
    Brief amici curiae of American Immigration Lawyers Association, et al. filed. (Distributed)
  7. Mar 27 2026
    Brief amici curiae of Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, et al. filed. (Distributed)
  8. Mar 27 2026
    Brief amici curiae of Immigration Law Professors filed. (Distributed)
  9. Mar 20 2026
  10. Mar 12 2026
    Record received electronically from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and available with the Clerk.
  11. Feb 27 2026
    Record requested from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
  12. Feb 25 2026
    Brief amicus curiae of Federation for American Immigration Reform filed.
  13. Feb 18 2026
    Brief for the petitioner filed.
  14. Feb 18 2026
    Joint appendix filed.
  15. Feb 11 2026
    SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, April 22, 2026.
  16. Jan 09 2026
    Petition GRANTED.
  17. Jan 09 2026
    As Rule 34.6 provides, “If the Court schedules briefing and oral argument in a case that was governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c) or Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 49.1(c), the parties shall submit electronic versions of all prior and subsequent filings with this Court in the case, subject to [applicable] redaction rules.” Subsequent party and amicus filings in the case should now be submitted through the Court’s electronic filing system, with any necessary redactions.
  18. Dec 23 2025
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/9/2026.
  19. Dec 23 2025
    Reply of petitioner Pamela Bondi filed. (Distributed)
  20. Dec 08 2025
    Brief of respondent Muk Lau in opposition filed.
  21. Oct 16 2025
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including December 8, 2025.
  22. Oct 10 2025
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 7, 2025 to December 8, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
  23. Oct 08 2025
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 7, 2025)
  24. Oct 08 2025
    Pursuant to Rule 34.6 and Paragraph 9 of the Guidelines for the Submission of Documents to the Supreme Court's Electronic Filing System, filings in this case should be submitted in paper form only, and should not be submitted through the Court's electronic filing system.