Featured Issue: Representing Clients Before ICE
This resource page combines resources for attorneys representing clients before ICE. For information about why AILA is calling for the reduction and phasing out of immigration detention, please see our Featured Issue Page: Immigration Detention and Alternatives to Detention.
Quick Links
- Seeking Stays of Removal
- AILA Practice Pointers and Alerts (continually updated)
- Practice Advisory: Representing Detained Clients in the Virtual Landscape
- Practice Pointer: How to Locate Clients Apprehended by ICE
- Practice Pointer: Preparing for an Order of Supervision Appointment with ICE-ERO
- AILA ICE Liaison Agenda and Meeting Minutes
Communicating with OPLA, ERO, and CROs
The Office of the Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA) includes 1300 attorneys who represent the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in immigration removal proceedings before the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR). OPLA litigates all removal cases as well as provides legal counsel to ICE personnel. At present, there are 25 field locations throughout the United States.
Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) manages all aspects of immigration enforcement from arrest, detention, and removal. ERO has 24 field office locations. ERO also manages an “alternative to detention” program that relies almost exclusively on the “Intensive Supervision Appearance Program (ISAP)” to monitor individuals in removal proceedings.
Since 2016, ICE has had an Office of Partnership and Engagement (formerly Office of Community Engagement) to be a link between the agency and stakeholders. As part of this office, Community Relations Officers (CROS) are assigned to every field office to work with local stakeholders such as attorneys and nonprofit organizations.
*Headquarters does not provide direct contact numbers or emails for individual employees.* (AILA Liaison Meeting with ICE on April 26, 2023)(AILA Doc. No. 23033004). However, attorneys can contact Chapter Local ICE Liaisons as they may have this information provided to them via local liaison engagement.
- DHS/ICE/OPLA Chief Counsel Contact Information [last updated in 2024, this list no longer appears on ICE.gov as of 1/27/25]
- Contact Information for Local OPLA Offices [last updated in 2024, this information no longer appears on ICE.gov as of 1/27/25]
- ERO Field Offices Contact Information*
- OPE Community Relations Officers
- ICE Check-In Scheduling Website
- ICE Online Change of Address Website
Latest on Enforcement Priorities & Prosecutorial Discretion
Executive Order 14159 (90 FR 8443, 1/29/25) directs DHS to set priorities that protect the public safety and national security interests of the American people, including by ensuring the successful enforcement of final orders of removal, enforcement of the INA and other Federal laws related to the illegal entry and unlawful presence of [noncitizens] in the United States and the enforcement of the purposes of this order. Given the January 25, 2025, confirmation of DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, a memorandum detailing enforcement priorities may be issued in the coming weeks.
An unpublished ICE memo from acting ICE Director Caleb Vitello entitled “Interim Guidance: Civil Immigration Enforcement Actions in or near Courthouses” makes reference to targeted noncitizens and includes:
- National security or public safety threats;
- Those with criminal convictions;
- Gang members;
- Those who have been ordered removed from the United States but have failed to depart; and/or
- Those who have re-entered the country illegally after being removed.
Procedures and email inboxes created under the Biden Administration to request Prosecutorial Discretion no longer appear on the ICE website. AILA members are encouraged to review current DOJ regulations entitled “Efficient Case and Docket Management in Immigration Proceedings” for alternative basis for seeking termination or administrative closure.
Access to Counsel
- ERO eFile:
- An online system developed to electronically file G-28s with ERO. Attorneys and accredited representatives may register for ERO eFile accounts and may also sponsor law students and law graduates who work under their supervision. See AILA’s practice alert (AILA Doc. No. 24051506) for more information.
- ICE Attorney Information and Resources Page
- AILA Practice Alert: Updates to the ICE Attorney Information and Resource Page
Filing Administrative Complaints on Behalf of Detained and Formerly Detained Clients
- Online Intake Form for the Detention Ombudsman (myOIDO)
- Available for complaints for issues in ICE and CBP Custody nationwide, including to submit complaints about access to counsel problems on behalf of currently or previously detained clients.
- Online Complaint Form for DHS Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL)
- Oversight of Immigration Detention: An Overview - May 16, 2022
(provides a list of agencies with which attorneys may file administrative complaints of detention center violations) - Immigration Judge Complaint Toolkit – August 31, 2022
- Practice Alert: Template for CRCL Complaint Regarding Failures to Provide Language Access – July 16, 2021
Selected ICE Policies and Current Status
For comprehensive comparison of current and prior ICE policies, please review the “Immigration Policy Tracker (IPTP).” The IPTP is a project of Professor Lucas Guttentag working with teams of Stanford and Yale law students and leading national immigration experts.
| Pre Jan 20, 2025 Status | Current Status |
|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Browse the Featured Issue: Representing Clients Before ICE collection
Policy Brief: Unchecked ICE Violence Sweeps in More U.S. Citizens, People with Legal Status, and People Applying for Legal Status
Since the start of the Administration, ICE has been responsible for countless unlawful and violent abuses against immigrants and U.S. citizens, leading to serious injury and death. This policy brief highlights recent abuses and offers AILA’s solutions for reforming the system.
EOIR Notice of Extension and Revision of Form EOIR-59, Certification and Release of Records
EOIR 30-day notice of the extension and revision of Form EOIR-59, Certification and Release of Records. Revisions include a new field to collect parent or guardian name, removal of the term “noncitizen”, and updated links and privacy policy. Comments are due 10/13/26. (91 FR 57930, 9/11/26)
Think Immigration: How the Trump Administration Is Monetizing Immigration Enforcement on the Back End
AILA Member Gunda Brost describes recent efforts by the Trump Administration to impose fines on individuals and businesses, writing that such notices “are essentially legal proceedings—not simply bills” and that one must “respond in a timely manner or important rights could be lost.”
CA9 Holds That Persecutor Bar Contains No Implied Duress Defense
The court held that the persecutor bar contains no implied duress defense and that evidence of the petitioner’s ties to the Atonal Battalion in El Salvador, together with an unchallenged adverse credibility finding, supported application of the bar. (Perez-Castillo v. Blanche, 9/8/26)
CA7 Holds That Petitioner Failed to Exhaust Challenges to Essential Elements of Asylum, Withholding, and CAT Claims
The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust administrative remedies because she did not adequately present to the BIA arguments challenging essential grounds for the denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection. (Gonzalez Perez v. Blanche, 9/8/26)
CA2 Holds That CBP Has Authority to Reopen, Reconsider, and Rescind Reinstatement Orders
The court held that reinstatement orders are final orders of removal subject to review, that petitioner was not entitled to equitable tolling of his untimely petition, and that 8 CFR §103.5(a) authorizes CBP to reopen, reconsider, and rescind reinstatement orders. (Santos v. Blanche, 9/8/26)
EOIR Policy Memorandum (PM) 26-07 on In-Office Adjudicator Voluntary Transfer Policy
EOIR Acting Director Sirce E. Owen issued policy memorandum (PM) 26-07 establishing a uniform policy for the processing of voluntary, in-person duty station transfer requests by EOIR adjudicators.
BIA Holds That Maduro’s Removal from Power and Transfer of Executive Authority Constituted Changed Country Conditions in Venezuela
The BIA held that the removal of former President Maduro from power and the ensuing transfer of executive authority constituted a change in country conditions in Venezuela for purposes of assessing an applicant’s prospective fear of persecution. Matter of A–E–V–M–, 30 I&N Dec. 20 (BIA 2026)
CA9 Finds Agency Erred by Requiring Formal Affidavit and Corroboration for Motion to Reopen In Absentia Order
The court held that the agency erred by requiring a pro se petitioner to submit a separate formal affidavit or corroborating documentary evidence for a motion to reopen an in absentia order where his factual assertions were not inherently unbelievable. (Trigueros Quizar v. Blanche, 9/4/26)
BIA Holds That DHS May Mail NTA to Most Recent Address the Noncitizen Provided, Overruling Matter of G–Y–R–
The BIA held that, when mailing a Notice to Appear (NTA) by regular mail, DHS can rely on the most recent address the noncitizen provided, and that written notice of in absentia proceedings is sufficient if mailed to the most recent address provided. Matter of Diji, 30 I&N Dec. 1 (BIA 2026)
EOIR Training Documents on Handling Requests for Continuances
On September 2, 2026, EOIR conducted an online training that instructed immigration judges on handling requests for continuances. AILA has obtained documents from this training, which have not been released by EOIR.
CA9 Holds BIA Abused Its Discretion by Denying Petitioner Opportunity to Show That Attorney’s Factual Admission Was Untrue
The court held that the BIA abused its discretion by affirming the denial of the petitioner’s motion to amend a pleading without allowing the petitioner to present evidence that his attorney’s factual admission regarding his manner of entry was untrue. (Urias-Gaxiola v. Blanche, 9/2/26)
CA3 Grants Government’s Petition for Rehearing En Banc and Vacates Prior Opinion in Laureano v. Att’y Gen.
The court denied the petitioner’s petition for rehearing, granted the government’s petition for rehearing en banc, and vacated its 5/29/26 opinion and judgment. (Laureano v. Att’y Gen., 9/2/26)
CA8 Says CAT Order Is Not a Final Order of Removal and 30-Day Petition for Review Deadline Is Not Subject to Equitable Tolling
The court held that a CAT order is not a final order of removal reviewable on its own under INA §242(a)(1) and that the 30-day deadline for filing a petition for review is a mandatory claims-processing rule not subject to equitable tolling. (B.P. v. Blanche, 9/2/26)
CA8 Finds It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review Standalone Negative Reasonable Fear Determination
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction under INA §242(a)(1) to review an IJ’s affirmance of an asylum officer’s negative reasonable fear determination because the decision is not a final order of removal and does not affect the validity of one. (Sebastian-Perez v. Blanche, 9/2/26)
CA1 Finds IJ Properly Applied Hardship Standard in Denying Cancellation to Petitioner Whose Son Had Asthma
The court held that the IJ properly applied the exceptional and extremely unusual hardship standard and considered the relevant evidence in denying cancellation of removal based on hardship to the petitioner’s children, including his son’s asthma. (Espinoza Benitez v. Blanche, 9/1/26)
CA7 Holds That Wisconsin Child Neglect Conviction Is Categorically a Crime of Child Abuse Under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i)
The court held that Wisconsin’s child neglect statute is categorically a crime of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i), rendering the petitioner’s conviction under the statute a bar to cancellation of removal. (Reynoso-Salgado v. Blanche, 9/1/26)
CA3 Holds That Change in Law Is Not Basis for Statutory Reopening and Rejects Equitable Tolling for Reconsideration
The court held that a change in law is not a basis for statutory reopening, that the petitioner’s untimely motion for reconsideration did not warrant equitable tolling, and that it lacked jurisdiction to review the denial of sua sponte reopening. (Aristy-Rosa v. Att’y Gen., 9/1/26)
USCIS Interim Final Rule on Affirmative Asylum Referrals Without Interview
USCIS interim final rule allowing asylum officers to refer certain asylum applications to EOIR without conducting an asylum interview. The rule is effective 7/28/26. Comments are due 9/28/26. (91 FR 47101, 7/28/26; 91 FR 55735, 8/31/26)
CA2 Finds Conspiracy to Retaliate Against Witness Under 18 USC §1513(b) Is Categorically a CIMT
The court held that conspiracy to retaliate against a witness in violation of 18 USC §1513(b) is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) and that the INA’s moral turpitude ground of removability was not unconstitutionally vague as applied. (Dziedziach v. Blanche, 8/31/26)
CA9 Holds That Circumvention of Lawful Pathways Rule Conflicts with Asylum Statute and That Agency Erred on Mixed Motives Analysis
The court held that the Circumvention of Lawful Pathways Rule conflicts with the asylum statute by restricting eligibility based on manner of entry, and that the agency also legally erred by failing to apply the complete mixed motives framework. (Garcia Morales v. Blanche, 8/31/26)
BIA Holds That DHS Properly Imposed Civil Penalty on Respondent Who Failed to Depart Under His Voluntary Departure Order
The BIA held that DHS properly imposed a civil monetary penalty after the respondent failed to depart the United States in compliance with his voluntary departure order, and that INA §240B(d)(1) does not require the failure to depart to be willful. Matter of R–P–L–, 29 I&N Dec. 859 (BIA 2026)
CA9 Holds That Agency Improperly Relied on Trivial Inconsistencies and Disregarded Translation Difficulties in Adverse Credibility Finding
The court held that the adverse credibility determination lacked substantial evidence because the agency improperly relied on trivial inconsistencies and disregarded significant translation difficulties, and that it also legally erred in denying CAT relief. (Mbueno-Vita v. Blanche, 8/28/26)
CA9 Holds That Notice Sent to Address DHS Told BIA Was Incorrect Was Not Reasonably Calculated to Reach Detained Noncitizen
The court held that where the BIA has been notified by DHS that a detained noncitizen’s location differs from the address used to mail a notice of appeal or briefing schedule and no additional reasonable steps are taken, such notice violates due process. (Jacques v. Blanche, 8/28/26)
CA9 Holds That BIA Erred by Requiring Quantitative Evidence of Torture and Failing to Give Reasoned Consideration to Expert Reports
The court held that the BIA erred by imposing a quantitative evidence requirement, where the regulations require it to consider all evidence relevant to the possibility of future torture, and by failing to give reasoned consideration to expert reports. (Parada Calderon v. Blanche, 8/28/26)