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
U.S. Attorney Office Remand Recommendations
A 5/10/05 unsigned memo from Appellate Counsel, Office of the Principal Legal Advisor, ICE, to U.S. Attorney Offices outlining process for seeking ICE concurrence on recommendations to remand federal court immigration cases back to the Board of Immigration Appeals.
CA6 Reverses BIA’s Finding that Albanian Political Activists Failed to Establish Past Persecution
CA6 found that the determination that Petitioners did not suffer persecution was not supported by substantial evidence, finding that the harm, including physical abuse, verbal harassment, home searches, and death threats compelled a finding of past persecution. (Gilaj v. Gonzalez, 5/9/05)
BIA Reinstates Same Voluntary Departure Time Granted By IJ at End of Removal Proceedings
The BIA held that, absent reasons to do otherwise, where a respondent's asylum and withholding of removal appeals have been denied, it will reinstate the same voluntary departure period granted by the IJ at the end of removal proceedings. (Matter of A-M-, 5/9/05)
AILA/TSC Liaison Minutes (5/9/05)
Discussions with Texas Service Center included such topics as I-485 approval notices, fingerprinting, preservation of priority dates, EB-5 processing, F-1 documentation, error on advance parole documents, handling of applications for persons in proceedings, and more.
CA9 Remands VAWA Cancellation Case
The court found that the IJ’s credibility determination was skewed by his own stereotypical assumptions about domestic violence and further found that the IJ’s refusal to allow expert testimony to address those credibility concerns violated due process. (Lopez-Umanzor v. Gonzales, 5/6/05)
CA3 Overturns BIA by Applying Mixed Motive Analysis
The court rejected the argument that the child had not met his burden of proof where the motivation for his arrest was based in part on a legitimate law enforcement purpose, noting that persecution need not be motivated solely by a protected ground. (Singh v. Gonzales, 5/5/05)
Alert: Restrictions on Judicial Review Imminent
The REAL ID Act, which seems likely to pass through Congress and the White House by next, contains a new set of severe limitations on judicial review. Find out how these new provisions will affect you and your clients.
CA9 Claims Jurisdiction to Examine Circumstances Causing Late Filing of Asylum Claim When IJ & BIA Fail to Do So
CA9 found that the IJ and BIA had failed to address Petitioner’s argument that his failure to file within one year was due to extraordinary circumstances remanded. It also overturned the IJ’s ruling that Petitioner was targeted for purely personal reasons. (Sagaydak v. Gonzales, 5/4/05)
Summary and Analysis of the REAL ID Act of 2005
AILA’s summary and analysis of selected immigration provisions of the REAL ID Act (H.R. 418) contained in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Package (H.R. 1268) revised to reflect the information provided in the 5/3/05 conference report.
BIA on Eligibility for Custody Redetermination
The BIA held that certain individuals screened for expedited removal and then placed in removal proceedings following a positive credible fear ruling are eligible for a custody redetermination hearing before an IJ. (Matter of X-K-, 5/4/05)
CA9 Finds BIA Has Authority to Extend Notice of Appeal Deadline in “Rare Circumstances”
Where Petitioner made a prima facie showing that overnight mail carrier failed to timely deliver the notice of appeal, the court found that the BIA abused its discretion when it failed to consider the “rare circumstances” exception. (Oh v. Gonzales, 5/2/05)
CA10 Declines to Adopt Definition of a Particular Social Group in Rejecting Asylum Claim of Honduran Debtors
CA10 held that regardless of which “particular social group” definition was applied, being small businessmen whose businesses were ruined by Hurricane Mitch, and who are indebted to private creditors, failed to meet any of the circuit courts’ tests. (Cruz-Funez v. Gonzales, 5/2/05)
CA4 Finds Insertion of an IUD and a Fine Not Persecution
CA4 found insertion of an IUD did not constitute persecution where Petitioner never had the IUD removed and had a child unharmed in China despite nonpayment of a substantial fine. It also found that the fine imposed did not constitute a threat to life or liberty. (Li v. Gonzales, 5/2/05)
State Bar of Texas Meeting Minutes (04/29/05)
Minutes from the 4/29/05 meeting of the State Bar of Texas Committee on Laws Relating to Immigration & Nationality.
CA3 Finds Child of Parents Subject to Coercive Population Controls Is Not Eligible for Asylum
The court concluded that Petitioner could not establish eligibility for asylum by virtue of the harm his parents suffered as a result of China’s coercive population control methods because his interest in the birth of the additional child is remote. (Wang v. Gonzales, 4/27/05)
CA1 Finds Jurisdiction to Review Denial of Hardship Waiver
The court held that INA §242(a)(2)(B)(ii) did not preclude review of a hardship waiver, because the “decision or action” -- that Petitioner was ineligible because she failed to prove she married in good faith -- is not discretionary. (Cho v. Gonzales, 4/19/05)
CA7 Reverses BIA’s Denial of MTR Based on 180 Day Deadline for Reopening In Absentia Proceedings
CA7 found that the deadline at INA § 240(b)(5)(C)(ii) “is merely a statute of limitations and is therefore subject to equitable tolling.” The court ordered the BIA to reconsider reopening based on the claim that prior counsel rendered ineffective assistance. (Pervaiz v. Gonzales, 4/18/05)
CA2 Finds Detention-Based Habeas Action Qualifies for EAJA Fees
The court held that a habeas petition challenging immigration detention qualifies as a "civil action" for the purposes of EAJA fee recovery and that an interim order of release pending appeal can confer prevailing party status. (Vacchio v. Gonzales, 4/18/05)
CA2 Says False Statement to Asylum Officer Is “False Testimony”
The court gave deference to Matter of R-S-J-, and found that false statements made under oath in an asylum interview is false testimony, thus precluding Petitioner from demonstrating good moral character. (Medina v. Gonzales, 4/14/05)
CA7 Overturns IJ’s Denial of Chinese Catholic Asylum Claim on Credibility Grounds
The Court found that the IJ’s negative credibility and lack of corroboration findings were not supported by substantial evidence. The Court criticized the IJ for repeatedly interrupting Petitioner’s testimony and not allowing her to explain her answers.(Huang v. Gonzales, 4/14/05)
CA9 Finds Denial of Right to Counsel
CA9 found that the IJ violated Petitioner’s right to counsel because he failed to afford him a reasonable time to obtain counsel. It notedthat practical considerations, like detention status and English language ability, should inform the determination. (Biwot v. Gonzales, 4/14/05)
CA8 Refuses to Review IAC Claim
The court considered, but ultimately did not decide, whether INA §242(d)(1) requires issue exhaustion for the ineffective assistance claim. The court stated that "ordinarily an appellate court does not give consideration to issues not raised below." (Etchu-Njang v. Gonzales, 4/8/05).
BIA Says Sexual Abuse of a Minor Bars 212(c) Relief
The BIA held that a person found removable due to conviction for sexual abuse of a minor is ineligible for a 212(c) waiver because the aggravated felony ground of removal he was charged with has no statutory counterpart in the 212(a) grounds of inadmissibility. (Matter of Blake, 4/6/05)
Text of the Civil Liberties Restoration Act of 2005
Text of the Civil Liberties Restoration Act of 2005 (H.R. 1502), introduced by Representative Howard Berman (D-CA) on 4/6/05. The bill seeks to roll back some of the most egregious post-9/11 polices and would secure due process protections and civil liberties for non-citizens in the U.S.
Post-Order Instructions for Submitting Biometrics
As part of the new security checks process for people in proceedings, this form has been provided by immigration courts to respondents who have been granted relief.