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 Says Petitioner’s Texas State Conviction for Injury to a Child Rendered Him Removable Under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i)
Applying the modified categorical approach, the court held that the petitioner had been charged with, and pleaded guilty to, causing bodily injury to a child, and thus that the BIA did not err in finding him to be removable pursuant to INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i). (Monsonyem v. Garland, 6/7/22)
CA9 Holds That Petitioner’s California Forgery Conviction Was a CIMT
The court upheld the BIA’s denial of cancellation of removal, concluding that the petitioner’s conviction for forgery under California Penal Code (CPC) §472 was a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) that disqualified him from relief. (Vasquez-Borjas v. Garland, 6/6/22)
Civil Rights Groups Reach Settlement with Federal Government in Lawsuit Concerning Illegal Immigration Arrests
Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus and the ACLU Foundation of Northern California reached a settlement agreement with the government to stop ICE from using a third-party contractor to perform civil immigration arrests at jails and prisons. (Solano v. ICE, et al., 7/6/22)
CA11 Concludes There Was No Legal or Constitutional Error in BIA’s Decision Denying Cancellation of Removal
Dismissing the petition for review, the court rejected the petitioner’s arguments that the BIA had erred in disregarding important facts in its hardship determination and had failed to render a reasoned decision after reciting the proper legal standards. (Flores-Alonso v. Att’y Gen., 6/6/22)
Tracking Changes to the EOIR Policy Manual
Use this page to track changes to the EOIR Policy Manual. On June 3, 2022, EOIR revised chapters 7.1 and 7.4 and added chapter 7.6 to update procedures for credible fear screening and consideration of asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection claims by asylum officers.
EOIR Updates Part II of the Policy Manual
EOIR updated chapters 7.1 and 7.4 of the policy manual, and added chapter 7.6 to update procedures for credible fear screening and consideration of asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection claims by asylum officers.
EOIR Issues Guidance on Pre-hearing Conferences in Immigration Proceedings
EOIR issued a memo on pre-hearing conferences, stating that, “immigration judges should therefore actively and routinely encourage parties to engage in pre-hearing communications, both for the efficiency of the court and for the efficacy of the pro bono representation.”
CA5 Finds Asylum Applicant Failed to Show That Haitian Government Was Unable or Unwilling to Protect Him
The court held that substantial evidence supported the IJ’s and BIA’s conclusions that the Haitian government was not unable or unwilling to protect the petitioner, a voodoo priest who had experienced several violent attacks against him and his family members. (Bertrand v. Garland, 6/3/22)
CA9 to Rehear Alfred v. Garland En Banc
The court ordered rehearing en banc in Alfred v. Garland, which held that convictions in Washington for robbery in the second degree and attempted robbery in the second degree did not qualify as aggravated felony theft offenses under INA §101(a)(43)(G), (U). (Alfred v. Garland, 6/3/22)
EOIR Factsheet on Immigration Judge Training
EOIR provided a factsheet on training for immigration judges. The training plan includes six weeks of initial training for new immigration judges, and the agency provides continued education for all sitting immigration judges throughout their tenure.
CA5 Upholds IJ’s Denial of Asylum to Salvadoran Petitioner After Finding Remand Would Be Futile
The court held that, although the IJ’s analysis was cursory, it nonetheless must be upheld because remand would be futile, where under circuit precedent the IJ would be forced on remand to conclude that the petitioner’s social groups were not cognizable. (Lopez-Perez v. Garland, 6/1/22)
CRS Reports on Discretionary Waivers of Criminal Grounds of Inadmissibility Under INA § 212(h)
CRS provided a legal sidebar on discretionary waivers of criminal grounds of inadmissibility under INA § 212(h). The report provides information on statutory bars to relief, eligibility requirements for a waiver, judicial review of waiver determinations, and more.
CA8 Finds BIA Did Not Err in Finding Petitioner’s New Asylum Claim Was Not Factually Independent of Prior Asylum Claim
The court denied the petition for review and vacated the stay of removal, concluding that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the petitioner’s third motion to reopen based on his failure to demonstrate prima facie eligibility for relief. (Li v. Garland, 5/27/22)
AILA and the Council Submit Comments on Credible Fear Screening and Asylum Processing IFR
AILA and the American Immigration Council submitted comments on an interim final rule, urging them to address due process and fairness issues that emphasize speed over accuracy, considered decision-making of protection claims by asylum seekers, and to withdraw a proposed expedited timeframe.
CA3 Holds That New Jersey Conviction for Endangering Welfare of Child in Third Degree Is a Crime of “Child Abuse”
The court held that the petitioner’s New Jersey conviction for endangering the welfare of a child in the third degree categorically met the BIA’s definition of “child abuse” and was sufficient to sustain the charge of removability under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i). (Nunez v. Att’y Gen., 5/26/22)
Guidance on Refunds of Flat Fees Under Prosecutorial Discretion Relief
The Doyle memo directed attorneys of the ICE Office of the Principal Legal Advisor to evaluate cases for different types of prosecutorial discretion. With one of the most significant types of discretion being dismissal of proceedings, this article addresses the specific issue of refunding flat fees.
Detention Ombudsman Reports 52% of Complaints Were About Living Conditions
AILA Policy Counsel Jen Whitlock writes about the Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman (OIDO) including the office's history, the data it has shared so far, and some key questions that remain; she urges everyone to use AILA's advocacy tool to tell Congress immigration detention is inhumane
CA5 Rejects Petitioner’s Argument That IJ’s “Aggressive” Questioning Denied Him Due Process
The court held that the record did not show “obvious bias,” and that petitioner had not pointed to record evidence showing IJ’s “hostility due to extrajudicial sources” or “a deep-seated favoritism or antagonism that would make fair judgment impossible.” (Cardona-Franco v. Garland, 5/24/22)
CRS Provides Infographic Comparing Use of Titles 8 and 42
CRS provided an infographic comparing the procedures utilized as part of Titles 8 and 42. The focus of the infographic is on procedures occurring at the southwest border. Data is also provided on Title 8 apprehensions and Title 42 expulsions.
ICE to Consider Military Service When Determining Civil Immigration Enforcement
ICE announced a policy directive to consider U.S. military service when making discretionary determinations with regard to civil immigration enforcement actions against noncitizens.
EOIR Announces Appointment of Five New Immigration Judges
EOIR announced the appointment of five new immigration judges to courts in California, Florida, and Massachusetts. Biographical information has been provided for each of them. Individuals interested in immigration judge positions are invited to sign up for job alerts.
DHS 60-Day Notice and Request for Comments on New MPP Disenrollment Request System
DHS 60-day notice and request for comment on a new public-facing Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) Disenrollment Request website. Comments are due 7/22/22. (87 FR 31254, 5/23/22)
CBP Reaches Settlement with Flores Class Members That Sets Detailed Standards for Safe Detention of Minors
The parties submitted a proposed settlement under which CBP agreed to a wide range of protocols requiring that detained minors be held in safe and sanitary conditions, not be separated from relatives, and have access to prompt medical treatment. (Flores, et al. v. Garland, et al., 5/21/22)
DHS Provides Privacy Impact Assessment on the MPP Case Request System
DHS provided a PIA on the MPP Case Request System, which individuals can use to review their enrollment in MPP if they believe they should not be included in the program. The PIA analyzes privacy risks associated with the collection of personally identifiable information as part of this effort.
AILA and Partners Send Letter to DOJ on Access to EOIR Records of Proceedings and Digital Audio Recordings
AILA and partners sent a letter petitioning DOJ to ensure timely and comprehensive access to EOIR records of proceedings and digital audio recordings and requesting a response within 45 days of the letter to schedule a meeting to discuss the issues.