INA §101(a)(13)(C) AT THE PORT OF ENTRY
Most returning lawful permanent residents are not treated as ordinary applicants for admission. INA §101(a)(13)(C), however, lists six circumstances that can change that result and expose the returning LPR to the inadmissibility analysis in INA §212.
INA §101(a)(13)(C) establishes the general rule that a person lawfully admitted for permanent residence is not regarded as seeking admission when returning to the United States.
The statute then lists six exceptions. If the government establishes that one applies, the LPR can be treated as seeking admission and may have to respond to a ground of inadmissibility.
This threshold issue can control the entire border case. Before analyzing whether an LPR is inadmissible, determine whether the person is legally being treated as an applicant for admission.
An LPR who has abandoned or relinquished permanent-resident status is within the statutory exception.
The government may examine travel patterns, residence, employment, tax filings, family ties and statements about whether the United States remains the person’s permanent home.
An LPR who has been absent from the United States continuously for more than 180 days falls within a specific §101(a)(13)(C) exception.
This does not itself mean the person loses permanent residence. It changes the admission framework that applies on return.
The statute also covers an LPR who engaged in illegal activity after leaving the United States.
The specific conduct and supporting evidence matter. The statutory exception should not be assumed from vague allegations alone.
INA §101(a)(13)(C) includes an exception for certain LPRs who departed while under legal process seeking removal from the United States and who have not received the relief specified in the statute.
The procedural history should be reviewed carefully because the existence and status of prior removal proceedings can determine whether this exception applies.
A returning LPR who has committed an offense identified in INA §212(a)(2) can be treated as seeking admission, subject to the statutory exception for specified relief.
This is why even an LPR who has lived in the United States for many years can face significant border consequences after foreign travel when criminal history exists.
The final statutory exception applies where the permanent resident is attempting to enter at an undesignated place or time or has not been admitted to the United States after inspection and authorization by an immigration officer.
The LPR may then be analyzed under the relevant INA §212 inadmissibility grounds. The person does not automatically lose permanent-resident status merely because CBP believes an admission exception applies.
Depending on the issue, the LPR may face additional inspection, parole for proceedings, immigration-court litigation, waiver issues or other procedures.
Criminal inadmissibility and returning-resident rules can interact in complicated ways. The precise statute of conviction, record of conviction, timing and immigration history may determine whether the returning LPR falls within §101(a)(13)(C) and whether a waiver or defense is available.
Do not assume that every arrest or conviction makes a green card holder inadmissible. The specific offense must be analyzed under the immigration statutes.
No. The default statutory rule says the opposite unless one of the six §101(a)(13)(C) exceptions applies.
No. An absence over 180 days can cause the LPR to be treated as seeking admission, but it does not automatically terminate LPR status.
Potentially. The criminal and immigration history should be reviewed before future travel.
No. Being treated as an applicant for admission and termination of permanent-resident status are different legal questions.
These government materials provide the principal legal and procedural framework discussed on this page.
The threshold admission question can determine which immigration rules apply and what defenses or waivers may be available.