Two recent legal cases involving the possible deportation of legal permanent residents, or green card holders, has brought new attention to the constitutional rights of legal permanent residents.
On March 26, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order blocking the arrest and deportation of Yunseo Chung, a 21-year-old Columbia University student. The Department of Homeland Security is seeking to deport Chung for her role in a protest related to the school’s disciplinary actions against other students involved in pro-Palestinian protests.
United States District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald ordered the government to cease attempts at detaining Chung while her immigration case proceeded. On March 24, Chung filed a lawsuit against President Donald Trump and other administration officials claiming that since she was a green-card holder, her First Amendment free speech rights, as well as other rights, had been violated.
Chung’s lawsuit says that she had attended a campus protest on March 5, and received a citation for obstructing governmental administration from New York City police. On March 8, the suit says a federal law enforcement official told Chung’s attorney that her green-card status was being revoked.
Chung’s attorneys pointed out the recent case of Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University graduate student, who was removed from his residence at the school and sent to a detention center in Louisiana. Khalil is also a green-card holder. Agents reportedly told Khalil that his legal permanent resident status had been revoked by the State Department.
In court filings, the government stated Secretary of State Marco Rubio had the right to revoke Khalil’s green card because “his presence or activities in the United States would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States,” citing part of the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 (or INA).
Khalil’s legal status is currently under consideration in a federal court based in New Jersey. The federal government is claiming Khalil failed to disclose material facts on his green-card application, which is cause for revoking his legal permanent resident status.
The Basic Constitutional Rights of Legal Permanent Residents
According to U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services, the holder of a green card has basic rights and responsibilities after becoming a permanent resident. The basic rights of legal permanent residents include: 1) the right to live permanently in the United States, provided the person does not commit any actions that would make them removable under immigration law; 2) the right to work at any legal work of their qualification and choosing; and 3) the right to be protected by all laws of the United States, their state of residence and local jurisdictions.
The responsibilities of green card holders include: 1) requirements to obey all laws of the United States and localities; 2) to file income tax returns and report income to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service and state taxing authorities; 3) to register with the Selective Service, for males ages 18 through 25; and 4) to support the democratic form of government. That does not give green card holders the ability or right to vote in federal, state, or local elections.
Several Supreme Court cases have confirmed that legal permanent residents or green card holders have the same basic constitutional rights that also protect natural-born citizens and naturalized citizens. In Bridges v. Wixon (1945), a divided Supreme Cort held that Harry Bridges, an Australian who had lived in the United States since 1920, could not be deported due to support for the Communist Party.
In his concurring opinion, Justice Frank Murphy defined the basic constitutional rights of legal permanent residents: “Once an alien lawfully enters and resides in this country, he becomes invested with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all people within our borders. Such rights include those protected by the First and Fifth Amendments and by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,” Murphy explained. “None of these provisions acknowledges any distinctions between citizens and resident aliens. They extend their inalienable privileges to all ‘persons’ and guard against any encroachment of those rights by federal or state authority.”
In another decision, Kwong Hai Chew v. Colding (1953), the Court considered the rights of a legal permanent resident merchant sailor, who was denied reentry into the United States after a four-month trip to the Far East “as an alien whose entry was deemed prejudicial to the public interest.” Kwong Hai Chew was detained and not told of the accusations against him. Justice Harold Burton concluded that “it is well established that, if an alien is a lawful permanent resident of the United States and remains physically present there, he is a person within the protection of the Fifth Amendment. He may not be deprived of his life, liberty or property without due process of law.”
And in Mathews v. Diaz (1976), Justice John Paul Stevens noted that, “there are literally millions of aliens within the jurisdiction of the United States. The Fifth Amendment, as well as the Fourteenth Amendment, protects every one of these persons from deprivation of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.”
One of the most important constitutional rights available to lawful permanent resident is the right to naturalization, or of becoming a United States citizen after a green card holder resides in the United States for at least five years. Among the requirements in the naturalization process are that a person is “of good moral character” who can “demonstrate an attachment to the principles and ideals of the U.S. Constitution;” be able to read, write and speak basic English; have knowledge and understanding of the fundamentals of the history, and of the principles and form of government of the United States; and take an Oath of Allegiance to the United States.
Naturalized citizens are exempt from many legal issues that could cause deportation for a green card holder or lawful permanent resident, with exceptions if the naturalization applicant provided fraudulent information.
One general requirement for green card holders, however, is “to obey all laws of the United States and localities.” If a legal permanent resident is found to have violated a law, they could be subject to removal through the immigration court system, which is part of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) in the U.S. Department of Justice. The government must present evidence to justify revoking their legal permanent status. If an immigration judge rules against the green card holder, they can appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals, followed by an appeal to a Federal Court of Appeals.
Scott Bomboy is the editor in chief of the National Constitution Center.
