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
CA3 Defines “Last Habitually Resided” in Refugee Definition
The court found that the IJ’s interpretation of “last habitually resided” based on the INA’s definition of “residence,” was permissible and agreed with IJ’s reliance on the length of time Petitioner stayed in Serbia, saying “habitual” means “long use.” (Paripovic v. Gonzales, 8/12/05)
Notes from NGO Meeting with CBP (8/11/05)
Discussions in a meeting between non-governmental organizations and officials from U.S. Customs and Border Protection included such topics as erroneous I-94s, CBP officer training, NSEERS, and expedited removal.
CA9 Finds that IJ Must Not Ignore Inconsistencies Simply Because They Weaken an Asylum Claim
The Court found that its cases do not mandate that an IJ ignore repeated and blatant inconsistencies that weaken a claim for asylum. (Kaur v. Gonzales, 8/11/05)
CA9 Construes Pending Habeas Appeal as Timely Filed Petition for Review
CA9 construes pending habeas appeal as a timely filed petition for review, finding this in line with Congressional intent in passing the REAL ID Act. Court declines comment on cases where the pending habeas petition requires further factual development. (Alvarez-Barajas v. Gonzales, 8/11/05)
Side-by-Side Comparison of the McCain/Kennedy & Cornyn/Kyl Immigration Reform Proposals
AILA’s side-by-side comparison of the McCain/Kennedy (S. 1033) and Cornyn/Kyl (S. 1438) comprehensive immigration reform proposals.
BIA Says 2-Week Absence Followed by EWI Does Not Break Physical Presence
Distinguishing from Matter of Romalez, the BIA held that a 2-week absence does not break continuous physical presence where the respondent was refused admission without threat of exclusion proceedings and reentered without inspection. (Matter of Avilez, 8/10/05)
CA8 Defines Relevant Period of GMC for Special Rule Cancellation of Removal
The court held that, according to the plain meaning of 8 CFR §240.66(b) and NACARA §203, a petitioner must show good moral character during the 7-year period immediately preceding the date of petitioner’s application for "special rule cancellation of removal.” (Cuadra v. Gonzalez, 8/10/05)
CA9 Cordes v Gonzalez Vacated (Updated 4/3/08)
On 2/25/08, CA9 vacated the panel opinion from 2005, stating that the BIA sua sponte reopened the proceedings, vacated the revmoval order and remanded to the immigration judge. As a result of the remand, the court stated that it lost jurisdiction of the case. (Cordes v. Gonzalez, 8/10/05)
CA8 Addresses New INA §242(a)(2)(D); Finds State Felony Simple Possession Conviction is an AgFel
The court ruled that even if the state offense would not qualify as an aggravated felony under federal law, “the plain language of the INA... states that any drug conviction that would qualify as a felony under either state or federal law is an aggravated felony.” (Lopez v. Gonzales, 8/9/05)
CA7 Says No Jurisdiction to Review Discretionary Challenge to One Year Asylum Filing Deadline
The court found that qualifying for the changed or extraordinary circumstances exception to the one year asylum deadline is a discretionary determination, and thus not reviewable, because it must be demonstrated “to the satisfaction of the Attorney General.” (Vasile v. Gonzales, 8/9/05)
CA5 Finds Chinese Christian Failed to Show He Was Persecuted for His Religious Beliefs
The Court stated that it was unable to conclude that Petitioner was persecuted on account of his religion. The Court upheld BIA’s determination that Petitioner feared not persecution, but prosecution for failing to register his church as required by Chinese law . (Li v. Gonzales, 8/9/05)
CA5 Upholds Finding That Petitioner’s Departure Constituted a Withdrawal of His Pending BIA Appeal
Because Petitioner chose to sightsee in southern Texas and did not pay attention to what an IJ concluded was an accidental departure from the US, the court held his actions sufficiently “voluntary” to withdrawal his pending appeal under 8 C.F.R. §1003.4. (Long v. Gonzales, 8/9/05)
IJ Terminates Proceedings Against NSEERS Registrant
The IJ granted the motion to terminate where information underlying the charge of removability was obtained in violation of "fundamental regulatory rights and implicit consitutional rights" during NSEERS registration. Courtesy of Mario Russell.
CA7 Finds No Pattern or Practice of Persecution Against Gypsies in Bulgaria
The Court upheld the BIA’s findings that Petitioner failed to show a nexus between her ethnicity and her treatment, despite her attackers’ use of ethnic slurs. The Court also found no pattern or practice of persecution of Roma in Bulgaria.(Mitreva v. Gonzales, 8/8/05)
CA7 Defines Assistance in Persecution of Others in Denying Claim of Punjabi Constable
CA7 held that the record must reveal actual assistance or participation in the persecution of others, noting the distinction between genuine assistance and inconsequential association. It found that Petitioner’s conduct crossed the line into actual assistance.(Singh v. Gonzales, 8/5/05)
CA2 Rejects Asylum Claim Based Solely on Mother’s Forced Sterilization
The court stated that just as parents are not eligible for asylum based on coercive population control measures practiced on their children, the children of parents who are victims of this policy are also not per se eligible. (Chen v. Gonzales, 8/5/05)
CA1 Upholds Denial of Asylum for Chinese Catholic
The court found no evidence that Petitioner suffered mistreatment in China because of her Catholic faith and that the climate in China was generally not oppressive for Catholics. (Zheng v. Gonzales, 8/4/05)
CA7 Finds Two Verbal Threats by FARC Did Not Amount to Persecution
The Court found that verbal threats for refusal to sell military supplies to FARC were not sufficiently immediate or menacing to be persecution, nor were the threats held to be on account of a protected ground.(Hernandez-Baena v. Gonzales, 8/4/05)
CA9 Rules Against Family Firmly Resettled in Canada in Effort to Discourage Forum Shopping
The Court held that a family who abandoned its refugee application in Canada after residing there for 4 years, was presumed to be firmly resettled. The Court found that forum shopping undermined the integrity of the international asylum regime. (Maharaj v. Gonales, 8/4/05)
CA9 Finds Russian Jew’s Cumulative Harm Amounted to Persecution
The Court found that the sustained economic pressure faced by Petitioner, the nature and extent of the physical violence she experienced, and the restrictions on her ability to practice her religion cumulatively amounted to persecution. (Krovota v. Gonzales, 8/4/05)
CA9 Finds that Asylum Hearing of Russian Pentecostal Did Not Comport with Due Process
The Court found that the IJ’s conduct was prejudicial, having excluded the testimony of several key witnesses, including Petitioner’s grandmother and an expert who could have affected the outcome of the proceedings. (Zolotukhin v. Gonzales, 8/3/05)
Chicago-Based Groups Release Report on Videoconferencing
Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice and the Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago released a study entitled, “Videoconferencing in Removal Proceedings: A Case Study of the Chicago Immigration Court,” calling for a moratorium on the use of videoconferencing until improvements are made.
CA7 Addresses Scope of Review of CAT Claims By Criminal Aliens
The court held that review of CAT claims by persons subject to INA §242(a)(2)(C) is limited to legal and constitutional claims, and not factual conclusions. (Hamid v. Gonzales, 8/2/05)
CA1 Finds Short Detentions Do Not Amount to Persecution
In an Albanian asylum claim, the court held that because Petitioner’s detentions lasted only 24 hours and he never needed medical attention as a result of the beatings he received, the harm did not amount to persecution. (Topalli v. Gonzales, 8/2/05)
CA2 Says BIA Erred in Failing to Consider China Country Report
The court found significant error in the BIA’s failure to consider the country report submitted by a Chinese asylum applicant where the report corroborated his fear of persecution based on his Christian religion. (Chen v. Gonzales, 8/2/05)