The brand-new 18th edition of Kurzban's Immigration Law Sourcebook is now shipping.Order Now
AILALink puts an entire immigration law library at your fingertips! Search the AILALink database for all your practice needs—statutes, regs, case law, agency guidance, publications, and more.
AILA Doc. No. 20032590 | Dated March 25, 2020
AILA provides a practice alert on ICE's personal protective equipment (PPE) requirements for attorneys in detained courts.
(Last updated 3/25/2020)
AILA’s ICE Liaison Committee has received reports that many jurisdictions are not allowing attorneys to represent clients in-person at detained courts unless attorneys provide and wear their own Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) (e.g., gloves, N-95 masks, and eye protection). Many attorneys cannot obtain and wear the PPE that is now required because of scarcity of equipment, health concerns, local stay-in-place orders, or for other reasons. Those attorneys should consider filing, as appropriate, motions to continue or motions to permit telephonic appearance.
In response to the COVID-19 outbreak, ICE is requiring attorneys to go through screening for in-person contact (without any physical barriers) visits. In addition, contact visits require all legal visitors, including attorneys, to “provide and wear” PPE. ICE indicates that the “overall authority to approve legal visits lies with the Warden or Facility Administrator; however, the facilities have been asked to notify its local Field Office Director as soon as possible of any denied legal visits.”
ICE encourages attorneys appearing in-person for court at ICE facilities, to contact the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) for any additional requirements.
Attorneys should consult Appendix R of the EOIR Immigration Court Practice Manual, now being frequently updated, which contains Standing Orders at local courts. As of the morning of March 25, 2020, there are Standing Orders specific to the courts at Adelanto, Arlington, Atlanta, Baltimore, Batavia, Boston, Buffalo, Chicago, Cleveland, Conroe, Dallas, Elizabeth, Florence, Hartford, Kansas City, Las Vegas, New York-Varick, Omaha, Pearsall, San Antonio, Lumpkin, Tacoma, Tucson, and York. Individual judges at various immigration courts have further released Standing Orders.
Some of the standing orders allow for telephonic appearance by attorneys without a motion. Others require notification to the court ahead of time, but by less formal means, including by email.
Many of the standing orders state that “any party appearing telephonically waives the right to object to admissibility of any document offered in Court on the sole basis that they are unable to review the document.” Attorneys should consider objecting on the record to this blanket waiver of a statutory right explicitly provided at INA § 240(b)(4) as fundamentally unfair, particularly where they are precluded from representing the client in person based on the PPE requirements.
ICE’s requirements for legal visits have been updated numerous times over the course of the past week. Practitioners can view the most current information from the agency at ICE Guidance on COVID-19.EOIR’s website page titled Operational Status During Coronavirus Pandemic can be found at EOIR Operational Status During Coronavirus Pandemic.
AILA is hosting information and relevant links at Coronavirus (COVID-19) Resource Center. which will be continuously updated. Attorneys are encouraged to communicate experiences with legal visits, PPE requirements, and detained courts to their chapter’s AILA ICE and EOIR liaisons.
Cite as AILA Doc. No. 20032590.
Discuss this global pandemic with your fellow members. What are you seeing at your local USCIS office, what visa offices are closed, how is your office handling, and more.Join Discussion
American Immigration Lawyers Association
1331 G Street NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20005
Copyright © 1993-
American Immigration Lawyers Association.
AILA.org should not be relied upon as the exclusive source for your legal research. Nothing on AILA.org constitutes legal advice, and information on AILA.org is not a substitute for independent legal advice based on a thorough review and analysis of the facts of each individual case, and independent research based on statutory and regulatory authorities, case law, policy guidance, and for procedural issues, federal government websites.