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
Practice Alert: Petitions of Writs of Habeas Corpus for Immigration Cases
AILA highlights the recent NILA advisory discussing the possibility of habeas writs being used for immigration cases that are unable to access existing statutory judicial review, or a new enforcement action not covered by § 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
Client Flyers
AILA offers concise educational flyers for members to share with their clients or prospective clients to inform them about a wide range of pertinent immigration law issues. Customizable versions are available.
CA1 Upholds Asylum Denial as to Ecuadorian Petitioner Who Was Attacked at Soccer Game and Denied Medical Care
The court upheld the BIA’s conclusion that the Ecuadorian petitioner had failed to establish a nexus between his attack at a soccer game and any protected ground for asylum, and had not shown a well-founded or reasonable fear of future persecution. (Vargas Panchi, et al. v. Garland, 1/13/25)
CA6 Upholds Asylum Denial as to Guatemalan Petitioner Threatened by Gang Members Who Extorted Him for Money
Where the petitioner had been extorted for money by suspected gang members in Guatemala, the court upheld the BIA’s and IJ’s determination that the petitioner’s particular social group (PSG)—“people afraid of gangs in Guatemala”—was not legally cognizable. (Mateo-Esteban v. Garland, 1/13/25)
CA3 Holds That Petitioner’s Fleeing-or-Eluding Convictions in Pennsylvania Did Not Qualify as CIMTs
The court held that one of the felony subsections of the Pennsylvania fleeing-or-eluding statute under which the petitioner had been convicted did not necessarily involve moral turpitude, and thus did not qualify as a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT). (Ndungu v. Att’y Gen., 1/13/25)
CA9 Holds That Petitioner’s Conviction in California for Dissuading a Witness by Force or Threat Was an Aggravated Felony
The court found that the petitioner’s conviction under California Penal Code (CPC) §136.1(c)(1) for dissuading a witness by force or threat was a categorical match to the generic federal offense of an aggravated felony relating to obstruction of justice. (Godoy-Aguilar v. Garland, 1/13/25)
AILA Files Stories Amicus Brief Urging the U.S. Supreme Court to Allow Judicial Review of “Withholding-Only” Cases
AILA urges the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the Fourth Circuit’s decision foreclosing a noncitizen from obtaining judicial review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) decision in a withholding-only proceeding.
ICE Fact Sheet on Facilitating Visitation for Parents in ICE Custody and Minor Children
ICE provided a fact sheet on what to do if a parent is in ICE custody and visitation is being arranged either in person or remotely.
ICE Contact Information for Detention Facilities
ICE provides contact information for each of its detention facilities.
AILA Urges Senators to Vote No on Laken Riley Act
AILA submitted a recommendation to senators that they vote no on the Laken Riley Act. AILA sent a similar vote recommendation to representatives.
DHS Final Rule on Immigration Bond Notifications
DHS final rule amending the regulations to authorize ICE to serve bond-related notices to obligors electronically. The final rule made no substantive changes from the 2023 interim final rule. The final rule is effective on 1/6/25. (90 FR 535, 1/6/25)
Practice Alert: Final Rule Issued Authorizing Service of Bond-Related Notices Electronically to Obligors
On January 6, 2025, DHS published the final rule to authorize ICE to serve bond-related notices electronically to obligors who consent to electronic delivery of service. The updated regulations can be found at 8 CFR §103.6(g-h). Read this practice alert for more information.
CA7 Finds It Lacked Jurisdiction to Consider Agency’s Discretionary Decision-Making in Denying Adjustment of Status
Dismissing the petition for review, the court held that both the IJ and the BIA properly considered and weighed the factors the petitioner presented in mitigation in denying her adjustment of status, and that the BIA applied the proper standard of review. (Zarzecki v. Garland, 1/3/25)
Client Flyer: What Is a Notice to Appear?
AILA provides a simple flyer to help your clients understand the basics of a Notice to Appear (NTA). There is a generic PDF version and a customizable Word version. Please share widely with your networks.
DHS Final Rule on Civil Monetary Penalty Adjustments for Inflation
DHS final rule on civil monetary penalty adjustments for inflation, including the assessment of civil monetary penalties for certain employment-related violations arising from the INA during 2025. Effective as of 1/2/25. (90 FR 1, 1/2/25)
CA1 Upholds Asylum Denial as to Brazilian Petitioners Who Feared Persecution on Account of Their Family Membership and Political Opinion
The court held that the Brazilian petitioners had failed to show a well-founded fear of persecution based on either their membership in a particular social group (PSG) consisting of “the Rodrigues family” or based on their political opinion. (Reginaldo Rodrigues, et al. v. Garland, 12/27/24)
DOJ Notice of Withdrawal of Proposed Rules
DOJ notice of withdrawal of two proposed rules (Motions To Reopen and Reconsider; Effect of Departure; Stay of Removal, and Good Cause for a Continuance in Immigration Proceedings), both published on November 27, 2020. (89 FR 107044, 12/31/24)
DHS/DOJ Interim Final Rule Delaying Effective Date of Security Bars and Processing Final Rule
DHS/DOJ interim final rule delaying the Security Bars and Processing Final Rule until 12/31/25. Comments are due by 1/27/25. (89 FR 105386, 12/27/24)
CA9 Finds That VAWA Petitioner Failed to Show Extraordinary Circumstances to Waive the Untimeliness of Her Motion to Reopen
The court held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in determining that the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) petitioner had failed to show the requisite extraordinary circumstances to waive the untimeliness of her motion to reopen. (Magana-Magana v. Bondi, 12/26/24, amended 2/19/25)
CA9 Finds That BIA Improperly Applied Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus Maxim to Discount Petitioner’s New Evidence
The court held that the BIA improperly applied the falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus maxim to discount the petitioner’s new evidence, explaining that the BIA must credit evidence supporting a motion to reopen unless the facts are “inherently unbelievable.” (Singh v. Garland, 12/24/24)
CA8 Holds That BIA Did Not Abuse Its Discretion in Denying Petitioner’s Motion to Reconsider
The court found that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the petitioner’s motion to reconsider, finding that it expressly considered the emotional hardship that his two sons might experience due to being separated from their father. (Chacon-Ruiz v. Garland, 12/24/24)
CA9 Holds That Conviction for Possession of Stolen Vehicle in Washington Was an Aggravated Felony and Particularly Serious Crime
The court held that the petitioner’s conviction for possession of a stolen vehicle in Washington was an aggravated felony under INA §101(a)(43)(G) and a particularly serious crime that rendered him ineligible for asylum and withholding of removal. (Chmukh v. Garland, 12/23/24)
CA6 Upholds Cancellation Denial Where Petitioner Failed to Show His Young Sons Would Suffer Exceptional and Extremely Unusual Hardship
The court held that the Mexican petitioner had not shown that his qualifying relatives—namely, his young U.S. citizen sons—would suffer hardship that was substantially different from or greater than that which normally results from a loved one’s removal. (Moctezuma-Reyes v. Garland, 12/23/24)
CA7 Upholds BIA’s and IJ’s Finding That Threats Against Guatemalan Petitioner Were Motivated by Personal Animosity
The court upheld the denial of the Guatemalan petitioner’s claims for asylum and related relief, finding that the agency’s conclusion that the petitioner had not experienced harm on account of a protected ground was supported by substantial evidence. (Mateo-Mateo, et al. v. Garland, 12/23/24)
How to Request Removal of Your GPS Monitor
This guide is intended as a practical resource for pro se individuals (people without lawyers) and is not a substitute for legal advice from an experienced lawyer. This guide will explain how to ask ICE to remove your GPS monitor (ankle monitor, wrist monitor, or SmartLINK app).