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
CA8 Finds BIA Did Not Err in Excluding Petitioner’s Mental Health Issues from PSC Analysis
The court found that because petitioner had failed to rebut the presumption set out in the Attorney General’s decision in In re Y-L-, the BIA did not err in not considering her mental health as a factor in the particularly serious crime (PSC) analysis. (Gilbertson v. Garland, 8/2/21)
CA4 Upholds BIA’s Asylum Denial to Former Member of MS-13 Gang in El Salvador
The court upheld the BIA’s denial of asylum to the Salvadoran petitioner, finding that his proposed particular social groups of “former members of MS-13” and “former members of MS-13 who leave for moral reasons” were overbroad and lacked social distinction. (Nolasco v. Garland, 8/2/21)
CA9 Holds That Convictions Under Hawaii’s Fourth Degree Theft Statute Are Not Categorically CIMTs
The court held that Hawaii’s fourth degree theft statute, a petty misdemeanor involving property of less than $250, is overbroad with respect to the BIA’s definition of a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) and is indivisible, and granted the petition for review. (Maie v. Garland, 8/2/21)
BIA Finds Tennessee Aggravated Statutory Rape Is Categorically a “Crime of Child Abuse”
The BIA sustained the DHS appeal and found that the offense of aggravated statutory rape under the Tennessee Code Annotated is categorically a “crime of child abuse” within the meaning of INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i). Matter of Aguilar-Barajas, 28 I&N Dec. 354 (BIA 2021)
AILA Recommendations on Biden Administration Enforcement Priorities
AILA offers recommendations to DHS on how to improve the interim enforcement priorities and ensure consistent implementation.
EOIR Releases FAQs Related to COVID and Immigration Courts
EOIR, consistent with public health officials’ guidance, released FAQs on its implemented practices related to COVID and immigration courts.
DHS Issues Statement on Expedited Removal Flights for Certain Families
DHS announced that it resumed expedited removal flights for certain families who recently arrived at the southern border, cannot be expelled under Title 42, and do not have a legal basis to stay in the United States. CBP returned individuals to Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras.
DHS Publishes Notification of Prior Ratification of Final Rule on Changes Applicable to Surety Bond Companies
DHS published notification in the Federal Register of Secretary Mayorkas’s 4/15/21 ratification of the final rule entitled “Procedures and Standards for Declining Surety Immigration Bonds and Administrative Appeal Requirement for Breaches.” (86 FR 40919, 7/30/21)
CA7 Holds That Nigerian Petitioner Was Removable for Having Procured Her Entry Visa by Fraud and Was Not Entitled to Asylum
The court found that the adverse credibility findings of the IJs as to petitioner and her ex-husband were supported by substantial evidence, and upheld the IJs’ conclusions that petitioner was removable based on her sham marriage and was not entitled to asylum. (Omowole v. Garland, 7/29/21)
CA8 Denies Cancellation of Removal to Petitioner Who Claimed He Was Battered by LPR Parent
The court concluded that the petitioner had failed to exhaust his claim that the BIA engaged in improper factfinding, and that it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA’s ultimate decision denying cancellation of removal as a matter of discretion. (Mencia-Medina v. Garland, 7/29/21)
CA5 Says Petitioner Failed to Show Nexus Between Her Fear of Mexican Drug Cartel and Her Immediate Family
The court upheld the denial of asylum as to the petitioner, who feared she would be killed or tortured by the Zetas in Mexico, finding that the BIA and IJ correctly concluded that familial ties did not sufficiently motivate the Zetas to target petitioner. (Vazquez-Guerra v. Garland, 7/29/21)
CA6 Upholds Asylum Denial Where Petitioner Failed to Show Guatemalan Government Was Unable or Unwilling to Control Her Abuser
The court held that its recent decision in Juan Antonio v. Barr did not undermine the BIA’s rejection of the petitioner’s claim that the Guatemalan government was unable or unwilling to control her ex-boyfriend’s abuse. (Gonzalez Ortiz v. Garland, 7/28/21)
CA2 Reverses Adverse Credibility Determination as to Petitioner Seeking Relief from Political Persecution in India
Where the petitioner sought relief from political persecution in India, the court found that the IJ’s adverse credibility finding was not supported by substantial evidence, concluding that a trivial inconsistency by itself did not reasonably justify the finding. (Singh v. Garland, 7/28/21)
CA4 Holds That It Has Jurisdiction to Review “Exceptional and Extremely Unusual Hardship” Standard for Cancellation Purposes
The court held that INA §240A(b)(1)(D)’s standard of “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” presents a mixed question of law and fact, which it retains jurisdiction to review under the Supreme Court’s decision in Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr. (Gonzalez Galvan v. Garland, 7/27/21)
Biden Administration’s Latest Move Does Real Harm to Asylum-Seeking Families
AILA denounced the Biden administration for plans announced to apply expedited removal to families apprehended in the southern border region; AILA is adamantly opposed and urges the administration to rethink this decision.
USCIS Updates Its FAQs Related to DACA
USCIS updated its FAQs related to DACA, including updated information regarding the 7/16/21 district court decision in Texas, et al., v. United States, which found the DACA policy “illegal.”
EOIR to Host Information Session in Advance of ECAS Launch at Certain Immigration Courts
EOIR invites interested parties to attend a virtual information session on August 26, 2021, in advance of the EOIR Courts and Appeals System (ECAS) launch at the Adelanto, Los Angeles – N. Los Angeles Street, and Los Angeles – Olive Street immigration courts. RSVP by noon on August 26, 2021.
DHS Resumes Expedited Removal for Certain Family Units
DHS announced that, beginning 7/26/21, certain family units who are not able to be expelled under Title 42 will be placed in expedited removal proceedings.
CA9 Finds U.S. Supreme Court’s Ruling in Pereida v. Wilkinson Was Consistent with Its Prior Decision in Marinelarena I
The court concluded that the Supreme Court’s decision in Pereida v. Wilkinson was consistent with its prior decision, and that petitioner failed to establish that her California conspiracy conviction did not involve a federally controlled substance. (Marinelarena v. Garland, 7/26/21)
DOJ Provides Reminders for DACA Recipients and Employers Regarding Employment Discrimination
On July 16, 2021, a federal court found DACA unlawful. This ruling does not affect ICE’s existing enforcement guidelines. In light of the court decision, DOJ issued reminders regarding employment discrimination and immigrant employee rights.
CA7 Upholds Finding That Petitioner with DUI Conviction Lacked Good Moral Character
The court upheld the BIA’s determination that petitioner was ineligible for cancellation of removal for lacking good moral character, where he had been convicted of drunk driving, had multiple vehicle-related traffic violations, and used a fake social security card. (Meza v. Garland, 7/20/21)
BIA Invites Amicus Briefs on Impact of Niz-Chavez v. Garland
The BIA invites amicus briefs on whether Niz-Chavez-Garland impacts the jurisdiction of an Immigration Court where the NTA fails to satisfy the statutory requirements of INA §239(a). Amicus briefs are due by 8/10/21.
CA8 Holds That Substitution of IJs Did Not Constitute a Violation of INA §240(c)(1)(A)
The court held that the issuance of the decision denying cancellation of removal to the petitioner by a different IJ than the one who had conducted the petitioner’s merits hearing did not violate his due process rights or the text of INA §240(c)(1)(A). (Orpinel-Robledo v. Garland, 7/19/21)
Sample Habeas Brief on Unlawfulness of Detention without Review for Arriving Asylum Seekers
Sample habeas brief (amicus or section of main brief) applying international human rights law and refugee law to argue that the detention of arriving asylum seekers without sufficient individualized determination of the need for detention, with review, is unlawful. (Motion for Injunctive Relief)
USCIS Issues Statement on DACA Court Decision in Texas v. United States
USCIS posted statements regarding the Texas v. United States decision, stating that DHS will continue to accept the filing of both initial and renewal DACA requests, as well as accompanying requests for employment authorization.