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
CA5 Holds Reinstatement Not Impermissibly Retroactive as Applied to Spouse of LPR
CA5 held that reinstatement of a prior removal order was not impermissibly retroactive. Although Petitioner’s I-130 was approved pre-IIRAIRA, a visa was not available and thus there was no vested right to adjustment before IIRAIRA’s effective date. (Rosa v. Gonzales, 6/25/07)
CA5 Upholds Removal of Petitioner for Falsely Claiming U.S. Citizenship to Gain Private Employment
CA5 held that private sector employment is a “purpose or benefit” under the INA and thus a person who falsely claims U.S. citizenship in order to gain such employment is inadmissible under INA §212(a)(6)(C)(ii)(I) and removable under INA §237(a)(3)(D)(i). (Theodros v. Gonzales, 6/25/07)
BIA Discusses “Mixed Motive” Asylum Cases
The BIA held that under the REAL ID Act, in mixed motive asylum cases, race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion must be at least one central reason for the claimed persecution. Matter of J-B-N- & S-M-, 24 I&N Dec. 208 (BIA 2007)
CA9 Holds USC Grandchild is Not a Qualifying Relative for Cancellation of Removal
CA9 held that a U.S. citizen grandchild, in the lawful custody of non-citizen grandparents, does not meet the statutory definition of “child” for purposes of cancellation of removal, nor do they qualify by virtue of a de facto parent-child relationship. (Moreno-Morante v. Gonzales, 6/21/07)
CA3 Holds Husband May Stand in Shoes of Wife in Population Control Case
The court upheld the BIA’s determination that one spouse’s qualifications for asylum may be imputed to the other spouse in coercive population control claims. (Chen v. Att’y Gen. of U.S., 6/20/07)
CA2 Remands to Allow Petitioner to Respond to Administratively Noticed Facts
The court held that the BIA abused its discretion in denying Petitioner’s motion to reopen based solely on administratively noticed facts, without giving Petitioner an opportunity to rebut the inferences drawn from those facts. (Chhetry v. DOJ, 6/20/07)
CA5 Discusses 120-Day Clock for Naturalization Adjudications Under INA §336(b)
The court held that when a CIS naturalization examination is premature because the FBI check is not complete, the 120-day period of INA §336(b) does not begin to run until CIS receives the FBI’s “definitive response,” as required by 8 CFR §335.2(b). (Walji v. Gonzales, 6/19/07)
BIA Discusses Waivers of Inadmissibility for LPRs
The BIA held that a returning lawful permanent resident seeking to overcome a ground of inadmissibility is not required to apply for adjustment of status in conjunction with a waiver of inadmissibility under section 212(h). Matter of Abosi, 24 I&N Dec. 204 (BIA 2007)
CA11 Remands Denial of MTR by Chinese Asylum Applicant with 2 USC Children
The court held that in light of the record, it was arbitrary and capricious for the BIA to find that Petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case for asylum or withholding based on the birth of two children in the US. (Li v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 6/18/07)
CA3 Finds BIA Erred in Applying Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Standard
The court held that the BIA abused its discretion in denying the motion to reopen and used this case to “clarify the analytical framework for claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in removal proceedings.” (Fadiga v. Att’y Gen. of U.S., 6/15/07)
CA5 Finds No Equal Protection Violation in Refusing to Give Effect to Foreign Expungement
CA5 held no equal protection violation in refusing to treat a foreign conviction, which had been expunged under England’s Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, in the same manner as it would have treated a conviction expunged under the FFOA. (Danso v. Gonzales, 6/15/07)
CA6 Remands Asylum Denial in Iraqi Case and Criticizes Conduct of IJ
The court held that, based on the IJ’s conduct and its effect on Petitioner’s ability to testify accurately, it could not conclude that the IJ’s adverse credibility finding was based on substantial evidence. (Elias v. Gonzales, 6/15/07)
CA6 Finds Chinese Labor Activist Was Persecuted for His Political Opinion
In reversing the IJ, the court found that Petitioner was persecuted not merely as a striker protesting his potential loss of employment, but as a political activist attempting to expose corruption by government officials and to protect workers’ interests. (Bu v. Gonzales, 6/15/07)
CA6 Finds IJ Jurisdiction Over Portability Determinations Under INA §204(j)
CA6 held that IJs have jurisdiction over I-140 portability determinations under INA §204(j), and that in the context of an adjustment application, the IJ can consider inadmissibility for misrepresentation, even if that ground was not charged in the NTA. (Matovski v. Gonzales, 6/15/07)
CA9 Rejects Polygraph Results and Medical Exam in MTR Indian Asylum Claim
CA9 held that polygraph evidence is not evidence that was previously unavailable within the meaning of 8 CFR §1003.2(c). The court also refused to consider a medical report regarding Petitioner’s scars for the same reason. (Goel v. Gonzales, 6/14/07)
CA2 on “Lawfully Admitted for Permanent Residence” in §212(c) Context
The court held that a person who obtains lawful permanent resident status by fraud or mistake has not been “lawfully admitted for permanent residence” for purposes of relief under former INA §212(c). (De La Rosa v. DHS, 6/13/07)
CA4 Finds Withholding Claim Cannot Be Based on Psychological Harm Alone
The court held that a withholding claim cannot rely solely on psychological harm, but must establish injury or a threat of injury to the applicant’s person or freedom. (Niang v. Gonzales, 6/12/07)
CA9 Rejects Negative Inference without Credibility Finding in Asylum Claim
The court found the IJ erred in relying on the negative inference drawn from Petitioner’s refusal to allow access to his Canadian immigration file. The court held that the IJ failed to make an express credibility determination, or to analyze Petitioner’s claim. (Singh v. Gonzales, 6/12/07)
CA7 Remands Chinese Claim for Ruling on Severity of Economic Sanctions
The court noted that the BIA is entitled to respond to normal country conditions but remanded the case for consideration of the financial penalties used when couples have two or more children and whether those amount to force. (Chen v. Gonzales, 6/11/07)
ICE Agent Affidavit in Support of Complaint Against Defendant Arrested Prior to Action Rags Raid
This document is an ICE Special Agent affidavit in support of a criminal complaint filed against an individual arrested prior to the Action Rags factory raid in Houston.
BIA Finds Parent with Two Chinese-Born Children May Qualify as a Refugee
The BIA held that a person who fathers or gives birth to two or more children in China may qualify as a refugee if established that the births are a violation of family planning policies that would give rise to a well-founded fear of persecution. Matter of J-H-S-, 24 I&N Dec. 196 (BIA 2007)
BIA Finds No Well-founded Fear for Chinese Parent with Second Child
The BIA held that the evidence did not demonstrate the Chinese has a national policy of requiring forced sterilization of a parent who returns with a second child born abroad or that local sanctions would rise to the level of persecution. Matter of J-W-S-, 24 I&N Dec. 185 (BIA 2007)
CA11 Finds No Nexus in Asylum Claim of Colombian Dentist
The court held that the record supported the conclusion that Petitioner was threatened for his refusal to provide dental services, which lacks a nexus between political opinion and persecution. (Rodriguez-Morales v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 6/6/07)
CA9 Finds Forced Abortion is Broad Concept; Does Not Require Physical Force
The court held that Petitioner suffered persecution where his wife was forced by her employer to abort her pregnancy, and she cried during the abortion that was performed without anesthesia. The court held he also qualified for withholding. (Tang v. Gonzales, 6/6/07)
CA2 Upholds Negative Credibility Due to Similar I-589 in Different Case
The court held that an IJ may consider “inter-proceeding” similarities in asylum applications in making a credibility determination and found that the IJ was reasonable in relying on these similarities because of his rigorous approach. (Ye v. Gonzales, 6/6/07)