The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the Trump administration in a significant immigration case. The case focused on the authority of government officials over green card holders who are accused of criminal activities.

The decision was a 6-3 vote, involving Muk Choi Lau, a lawful permanent resident. Returning from China in 2012, Lau was placed on immigration parole due to accusations of counterfeiting. He was then swiftly subjected to deportation proceedings after pleading guilty to selling counterfeit goods in New Jersey.

“Border officers did not have the burden to establish by clear and convincing evidence that Lau had committed a crime involving moral turpitude,” Justice Clarence Thomas stated in his opinion.

However, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson disagreed with the ruling. She expressed concern that it placed Lau in “immigration limbo” even before a conviction.

“I worry that the Court has now handed the Government a massive blank check,” wrote Jackson in her dissent, joined by two liberal colleagues.

The decision has sparked differing viewpoints. The Alliance for Justice, a liberal group, voiced concerns about broader implications for green card revocations. In contrast, Advancing American Freedom, founded by former Vice President Mike Pence, welcomed the decision as crucial for removing those who misuse their permanent resident status.

This ruling is part of ongoing immigration-related challenges linked to President Trump’s broad crackdown on immigration, started before his presidency. Authorities argued that even the suspicion of a crime provides grounds to place green card holders on immigration parole.

The Supreme Court is currently evaluating other cases regarding immigration policies, including efforts to conclude birthright citizenship and alter asylum policies, amid Trump’s administration’s tough stance.