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
CA11 Concludes That Petitioner’s Federal Conviction for Making False Statements in an Immigration Application Was an Aggravated Felony
The court denied the petition for review, holding that because petitioner was convicted of a violation of 18 USC §1546(a) and his sentence was greater than one year, his conviction expressly fell under the definition of aggravated felony in INA §101(a)(43)(P). (Germain v. Att'y Gen., 8/18/21)
CA9 Says Vehicle Theft Under California Vehicle Code §10851(a) Is Not an Aggravated Felony
Granting in part the petition for review, the court held that vehicle theft under California Vehicle Code §10851(a) is indivisible in its treatment of accessories after the fact, and thus is not an aggravated felony theft offense under INA §101(a)(43)(G). (Lopez-Marroquin v. Garland, 8/18/21)
CA9 Holds That Petitioner Did Not Suffer Past Persecution in India After Considering Non-Exhaustive List of Factors
The court held that the record did not compel the conclusion that the petitioner suffered hardship in India that rose to the level of past persecution, where he did not experience significant physical harm and his harm was an isolated event, among other factors. (Sharma v. Garland, 8/17/21)
AILA Joins the American Immigration Council in Calling on the Biden Administration to Block the Return of MPP
AILA, the American Immigration Council, and other organizations call on the Biden administration to appeal the erroneous and factually incorrect decision issued by a federal judge in Texas that ordered DHS to “enforce and implement MPP in good faith” for an indefinite period of time.
DHS Announces Alternatives to Detention Case Management Pilot Program
DHS announced a new Alternatives to Detention Case Management Pilot Program, meant to ensure that noncitizens have access to legal information and other services. The pilot will supplement existing ICE Alternatives to Detention programs. Applications to serve on the program’s board are due 9/17/21.
DHS Releases Statement on Safety and Immigration Enforcement During Tropical Storm Fred
DHS announced it is monitoring Tropical Storm Fred and “absent extraordinary circumstances, immigration enforcement will not be conducted at locations where disaster and emergency relief related to this storm is being provided.”
CA9 Says Failure to Notify Petitioner That Alleged False Claim of Citizenship Would Be at Issue During Hearing Violated Due Process
The court held that the IJ failed to put the petitioner on notice that his alleged false claim of U.S. citizenship would be at issue during his hearing, and that such failure violated due process by denying him a full and fair hearing. (Flores-Rodriguez v. Garland, 8/16/21)
AILA President Allen Orr Responds to Federal Judge Decision to Reinstate “Remain in Mexico” Asylum Policy
AILA President Allen Orr shared a statement in response to the nationwide injunction issued on August 13, 2021, directing the Biden administration to reinstate the Migrant Protection Protocols, commonly known as “Remain in Mexico.”
CRCL Issues Recommendations to CBP Concerning COVID and Title 42
CRCL provided policy recommendations to CBP on the handling of undocumented individuals subject to expulsion under Title 42, specifically around medical care and humanitarian protections. CRCL advised that CBP assign case numbers to individuals, consider emergent medical conditions, and more.
CA5 Finds BIA Did Not Err by Declining to Construe Petitioner’s Motion to Reconsider as a Motion to Reopen
Where the petitioner alleged that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Sessions v. Dimaya made his removal unlawful, the court held that the BIA did not err by construing his motion as a motion to reconsider nor by denying it as time barred. (Gonzalez Hernandez v. Garland, 8/13/21)
CA8 Upholds Denial of Deferral of Removal Under the CAT to Somalian Petitioner
Where BIA had reversed the IJ’s findings that petitioner would more likely than not be tortured in Somalia, the court found that BIA applied the correct legal standard to the Convention Against Torture (CAT) claim and did not engage in impermissible fact finding. (Mohamed v. Garland, 8/13/21)
CRS Releases Report on State and Local Immigration Enforcement via the 287 Program
CRS provided an In Focus report on increased participation in Section 287(g) of the INA under the Trump administration, the current S287(g) models and oversight, racial profiling as a result of the program, and lawmaker interest in amending or abolishing the program.
CA9 Holds That INA §212 Applies for Cancellation of Removal Purposes to Petitioner Who Legally Entered the United States
The court upheld BIA’s determination that petitioner was ineligible for cancellation of removal under INA §240A(b)(1)(C) due to his conviction for an offense described in INA §212(a)(2), even though he had been previously admitted into the United States. (Sanchez-Ruano v. Garland, 8/11/21)
BIA Dismissed Appeal After Finding NACARA Grant Bars Applicant from Applying for Cancellation
The BIA dismissed the appeal after concluding that the respondent’s prior receipt of special rule cancellation of removal under the NACARA bars her from applying for cancellation of removal. Matter of Hernandez-Romero, 28 I&N Dec. 374 (BIA 2021)
ICE Releases Updated Guidance Regarding Civil Immigration Enforcement Actions Involving Noncitizen Crime Victims
ICE released ICE Directive 11005.3, Using a Victim-Centered Approach with Noncitizen Crime Victims, with guidance on how it will handle civil immigration enforcement actions involving noncitizen crime victims.
ICE Releases FAQs on Enforcement Actions Involving Noncitizen Crime Victims
ICE released FAQs related to its policy update regarding civil immigration enforcement actions involving noncitizen crime victims, including applicants for and beneficiaries of victim-based immigration benefits.
EOIR Announces New Format for BIA Unpublished Decisions
EOIR announced that effective August 9, 2021, the BIA will begin transitioning to a new format for unpublished decisions. The new format is similar to that used for federal court decisions.
CA8 Upholds Denial of Motion to Reopen Based on Changed Country Conditions in Somalia
The court held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the petitioner’s motion to reopen, where the evidence showed that the poor conditions facing homosexuals and Christians in Somalia have remained substantially similar since the time of her hearing. (Yusuf v. Garland, 8/9/21)
AILA and Partners Submit Amicus Brief on Notice to Appear Failure of INA §239 (a)(1)
AILA and partners submitted a brief arguing that the requirements in INA §239(a)(1) are, at a minimum, mandatory claim processing rules that must be enforced whenever a respondent timely objects to a non-compliant Notice to Appear (NTA) and termination is the proper remedy for the violations.
CA5 Says It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review BIA’s Prima Facie Hardship Determination Pursuant to INA §242(a)(2)(B)(i)
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA’s finding that the petitioner had not presented prima facie evidence of her eligibility for cancellation of removal pursuant to INA §242(a)(2)(B)(i). (Parada-Orellana v. Garland, 8/6/21)
CRS Releases Report on In Absentia Removal Order Rates
CRS provided an In Focus that explained the legal requirements for in absentia removal orders, how EOIR calculates in absentia rates, how to interpret those rates, and more.
CA9 Remands for BIA to Consider Petitioner’s Social Group Claim Based on His Perceived Gang Membership
The court remanded for the BIA to consider in the first instance whether the petitioner was eligible for withholding of removal on account of his membership in the particular social group of “people erroneously believed to be gang members.” (Vasquez-Rodriguez v. Garland, 8/5/21)
CA11 Finds Florida Conviction for Being a Felon in Possession of a Firearm Is Not a “Firearm Offense” Under the INA
The court held that the petitioner’s conviction in Florida under Fla. Stat. §790.23(1)(a) for being a felon in possession of a firearm did not constitute a “firearm offense” within the meaning of INA §237(a)(2)(C) and its cross-reference to 18 USC §921(a)(3). (Simpson v. Att’y Gen., 8/4/21)
CA8 Finds “Mexican Mothers Who Refuse to Work for the Cartel” Is Not a PSG
The court held that the BIA did not err in finding that the petitioner’s proposed particular social group (PSG) of “Mexican mothers who refuse to work for the Cartel Jalisco Nueva Generación” was not sufficiently particularized or socially distinct. (Rosales-Reyes v. Garland, 8/4/21)
AILA Submits Amicus Brief on the Application of the Persecutor Bar
AILA submitted an amicus brief in Negusie v. Garland, arguing that the BIA decision that allows an individual to be returned on mere speculation that the persecutor bar might possibly apply is “utterly inconsistent” with Congress’s intent.