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
CA2 Finds No Well-founded Fear of Persecution in China
The court denied asylum where Petitioner based his claim on the fear that he would be arrested and sent to a labor camp for twice distributing pro-democracy flyers when he was 16 years old. (Lin v. Gonzales, 3/17/06)
CA9 Holds That Applicants for Admission, Including Asylum Seekers, Cannot Be Indefinitely Detained
The court held that the indefinite detention of applicants for admission “is unreasonable, unjustified, and in violation of federal law,” and granted Petitioner’s motion for immediate release under FRAP 23(b). (Nadarajah v. Gonzales, 3/17/06)
Section-by-Section Summary of S. 2454
A section-by-section summary of the Securing America’s Borders Act (S. 2454), introduced by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) on March 16. The summary was prepared by Frist’s office.
Text of the Securing America’s Borders Act
Text of the Securing America’s Borders Act (S. 2454), introduced by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) on 3/16/06.
CA2 Finds No Jurisdiction to Review Denial of Adjustment and §212(h) Waiver
The court held that INA §242(a)(2)(B)(i) barred review of the denial of an application for adjustment of status and §212(h) waiver because such denials are committed to the Attorney General’s discretion. (Bugayong v. INS, 3/15/06)
CA2 Rejects Adverse Credibility Determination in Russian Asylum Claim
The court found that six of the seven bases given by the IJ for his adverse credibility determination were erroneous, and noted that the IJ’s decision contained misstatements of Petitioner’s testimony and flawed reasoning. (Pavlova v. INS, 3/14/06)
CA9 Vacates Motion to Reopen Denial Issued Before the End of the 90-Day Filing Period (Updated 4/10/06)
The court struck down the BIA’s summary denial of a skeletal motion to reopen, in which counsel indicated an intention to file a brief and additional documentation, before the end of the 90-day filing window. (Yeghiazaryanv v. Gonzales, 3/10/06)
EOIR's Automated Telephone Case Status Information System
EOIR notice discusses how to access the automated telephone case status information system.
EOIR Attempts to Justify 2002 Restructuring
Release from the Executive Office for Immigration Review attempts to justify the the "streamlining" provisions implemented in 2002.
BIA Finds that Adjustment Can Not Be Based on a Previously Used Visa Petition
The BIA held that an application for adjustment of status cannot be based on an approved visa petition that has already been used by the beneficiary to obtain adjustment of status or admission as an immigrant. Matter of Villarreal-Zungia, 23 I&N Dec. 886 (BIA 2006)
EOIR Notice Regarding Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Requests
EOIR notice provides information about submitting Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
CA9 Says Statutory Rape is Not a Per Se Crime of Violence (Updated 4/10/06)
The court held that, where the minor consents, a conviction for statutory rape under California Penal Code §261.5(c) is not a crime of violence because it does not involve a substantial risk of violence in its commission. (Valencia v. Gonzales, 3/6/06)
CA9 Holds Voluntary Departure Must Be “Knowing and Voluntary” Before it Breaks Continuous Physical Presence
Voluntary departure only breaks continuous physical presence for cancellation purposes when there is substantial evidence of the order and the person has knowingly and voluntarily consented to, the terms of the VD agreement. (Ibarra-Flores v. Gonzales, 3/6/06)
Sign-On Letter to Senate Opposing Provisions in Chairman’s Mark That Would Harm Asylum Seekers
Letter signed by 84 organizations and 117 individuals and delivered to the Senate on 3/6/06, opposing provisions in the Chairman’s Mark that would harm “vulnerable populations, including asylum-seekers, children, trafficking victims, and others seeking protection in the United States.”
CA2 Says Women Sold into Marriage in China Is a Social Group
The court found that women who have been sold into marriage and who live in a part of China where forced marriages are considered valid and enforceable is a particular social group for purposes of asylum. (Gao v. Gonzales, 3/3/06)
CA8 Says Pre-IIRIRA Advance Parole Regulation is Not Ultra Vires to Suspension of Deportation Provision
The court rejected Petitioner’s claim that the advance parole regulation, which mandated placement in exclusion proceedings thus preventing him from seeking suspension of deportation, was ultra vires to the suspension provision.(Geach v. Chertoff, 3/3/06)
CA8 Upholds Decision that Catholic Indonesian Did Not Suffer Past Persecution and Does Not Have a Well-Founded Fear
The court held that past persecution does not normally include unfulfilled threats of physical injury. The court also found the IJ did not err with regard to his well-founded fear finding because the harm feared was not nationwide. (Setiadi v. Gonzales, 3/3/06)
CA7 Holds a Petition for Review That Only Impacts Duration of Inadmissibility Is Ripe and Aggravated Discharge of a Firearm Is Crime of Violence
Where Petitioner conceded removability for a firearms offense but disputed the offense was a crime of violence, the court concluded the case was ripe for judicial review because resolution would determine the length of Petitioner’s future inadmissibility. (Quezada-Luna v. Gonzales, 3/3/06)
CA9 Addresses Interplay Between Discretionary Bar to Judicial Review and Motion to Reopen Denials
The court found it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen where the BIA had previously made an adverse discretionary determination concerning relief enumerated in INA §242(a)(2)(B)(i). (Fernandez v. Gonzales, 3/2/06)
US ICE Publishes New Organizational Chart
US ICE Organizational Chart as of January 2006.
CA8 Reviews Denial of Motion to Rescind 1995 In Absentia Order for Lack of Notice of the Hearing
The court refused to consider affidavits attesting to lack of notice to determine whether Petitioner overcame the presumption of effective service because they were not submitted to the IJ and its review was limited to the record. (Rodriguez-Cuate v. Gonzales, 2/24/06)
CA9 Says §245(i) AOS Trumps Inadmissibility under INA §212(a)(9)(C)(i)(I)
Relying on Perez-Gonzalez, CA9 held that Petitioner is eligible for adjustment of status under INA §245(i) despite inadmissibility under INA §212(a)(9)(C)(i)(I) for having illegally reentered after having accrued more than a year of unlawful presence. (Acosta v. Gonzales, 2/23/06)
CA2 Denies Motion to Reinstate Petition for Review
The court acknowledged its authority to reinstate a petition for review “where manifest injustice would otherwise result,” but denied the motion because it concluded the petition for review was meritless. (Valbrun v. Gonzales, 2/22/06)
CA2 Discusses Subtle Inconsistencies and Credibility Determinations
In a case of first impression, the court held that where an inconsistency is not self-evident, an IJ may not rely on it without first bringing it to the attention of the applicant and giving the applicant the opportunity to explain. (Xue v. BIA, 2/21/06)
CA2 Upholds Denial of MTR in Chinese Family Planning Case
The court held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion because it considered and rejected evidence of changed country conditions, and further concluded that remand would be futile. (Wang v. BIA, 2/17/06)