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 Holds That Removal Under INA §237(a)(4)(A)(i) for Violating an Export Law Is Not Limited to National Security Threats
The court held that the removal ground for export law violations, INA §237(a)(4)(A)(i), is not limited to national security threats and covered the petitioner’s unlawful export of firearms, and that substantial evidence supported the denial of CAT deferral. (Olibris v. Blanche, 8/14/26)
CA9 Holds That Former Salvadoran Police Officer Failed to Show Persecution Was on Account of His Former Police Status
The court held that substantial evidence supported the finding that the petitioner, a former Salvadoran police officer, failed to establish a nexus to his status as a former officer, because all the threats he received occurred while he was still active. (Gonzalez-Argueta v. Blanche, 8/13/26)
BIA Holds That Georgia Sentence “Clarification” Order Was Invalid for Immigration Purposes
The BIA held that a Georgia state court sentence “clarification” order issued by a different judge more than six years after the sentencing order and after respondent had been placed into removal proceedings was not valid for immigration purposes. Matter of Boye, 29 I&N Dec. 826 (BIA 2026)
Think Immigration: Prepping Paralegals in the Current Immigration Law Environment
AILA Paralegals Conference Chair Mo Goldman details the challenges in the current immigration law environment as major policy changes take effect, writing that "the requisites are becoming more stringent, and the chances of rejected filings or denials have increased exponentially."
CA1 Holds That Conviction for Witness Retaliation in New Hampshire Was Not an Aggravated Felony Relating to Obstruction of Justice
The court held that a New Hampshire conviction for witness retaliation was not an aggravated felony offense relating to obstruction of justice under INA §101(a)(43)(S), so it did not render petitioner removable as an aggravated felon under INA §237(a)(2)(A)(iii). (Bangs v. Blanche, 8/11/26)
CA4 Holds That INA §242(b)(1)’s 30-Day Petition for Review Deadline Is Subject to Equitable Tolling
The court held that INA §242(b)(1)’s 30-day deadline is subject to equitable tolling, and found that the BIA erred in its political opinion and particular social group (PSG) analyses and abused its discretion in denying CAT relief. (Navarro Cerritos v. Blanche, 8/11/26)
Practice Alert: Federal Court Restores Key Protections for VAWA, U, and T Petitioners Facing ICE Detention
A federal court decision has temporarily restored important protections from arrest, detention, and removal for certain immigrant survivors with pending VAWA self-petitions, and U and T visa petitions.
SAVE and E-Verify Update on TPS for Somalia
SAVE and E-Verify issued updates on EADs for TPS-holders from Somalia. EADs issued under this TPS designation remain valid and are extended. SAVE and E-Verify will display an expiration date of 8/12/26. The updates supersede prior guidance.
CA4 Holds That Nexus Analysis Must Focus on Why Persecutor Threatened Petitioner, Not Another Person
The court held that the agency legally erred by focusing on why the persecutor targeted her former partner rather than why he threatened her, and that the record compelled the conclusion that the nexus requirement was met. (Orellana-Ramos v. Blanche, 8/10/26)
CA9 Holds That Oregon Conviction for Using a Child in Display of Sexually Explicit Content Is Categorically a Crime of Child Abuse
The court held that the Mexican petitioner’s Oregon conviction for using a child in a display of sexually explicit content was categorically a crime of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment, rendering him removable under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i). (Gonzalez-Godinez v. Blanche, 8/10/26)
CA9 Finds Petitioner’s California Conviction for Distributing Harmful Matter to Minor Was Categorically a Crime of Child Abuse
The court held that the Mexican petitioner’s conviction under California Penal Code §288.2(b) for distributing harmful matter to a minor to seduce that minor was categorically a crime of child abuse under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i) barring cancellation of removal. (Adame Garcia v. Blanche, 8/10/26)
CA1 Holds Substantial Evidence Supports No Nexus Where Robberies Were for Financial Gain and Threats Were Revenge
The court held that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s conclusion that no protected ground was a reason for petitioner’s harm, where robberies were for financial gain and threats were revenge, and thus upheld the denial of asylum and related claims. (Monzon Guzman v. Blanche, 8/7/26)
CA6 Holds That Serious-Nonpolitical-Crime Bar’s “Serious Reasons for Believing” Standard Requires Only Probable Cause
The court held that the serious-nonpolitical-crime bar’s “serious reasons for believing” standard requires only probable cause, and that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s conclusion that the government met its burden of establishing probable cause. (Spindola v. Blanche, 8/7/26)
EOIR Issues Fact Sheet on Immigration Judge Training
EOIR issued a fact sheet on the training program for immigration judges. The initial training is five weeks long, with additional ongoing training.
New Edition of Kurzban’s Immigration Law Sourcebook Released by AILA
AILA is proud to release the 20th edition of Kurzban’s Immigration Law Sourcebook, the must-have resource filled with expert guidance helping readers navigate the labyrinthine U.S. immigration laws, including recent Supreme Court rulings and their impact.
CA5 Holds That Adverse Credibility Findings on Employment and Imprisonment as to Afghan Petitioner Were Unsupported
The court held that the agency’s adverse credibility finding as to the Afghan petitioner’s employment history and prior imprisonment was not supported by substantial evidence, and that the agency failed to meaningfully consider key evidence supporting his claims. (Eqbal v. Blanche, 8/6/26)
CA8 Holds That Departure Bar Is Invalid for Statutory Motions to Reopen and Rejects BIA’s Jurisdictional Limitation
The court held the departure bar regulation, 8 CFR §1003.2(d), conflicts with the motion to reopen statute, INA §240(c)(7), and thus found that the BIA abused its discretion in denying petitioner’s statutory motion to reopen and in holding it lacked jurisdiction. (Lacsina v. Blanche, 8/6/26)
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.
CA11 Holds That an EOIR Disciplinary Complaint Satisfies Lozada’s Third Requirement
The court held an EOIR complaint satisfies Matter of Lozada’s third requirement, that substantial compliance satisfies Lozada’s procedural requirements, and that the BIA abused its discretion in denying reopening. (Pasqual-Andres v. Att’y Gen., 8/4/26)
CA4 Holds That IJ Denied Reasonable Opportunity to Show Third Country Removal Hardship Supporting Cancellation of Removal
The court held the IJ denied petitioner a reasonable opportunity under INA §240(b)(4)(B) to show third country removal would subject her citizen daughters to exceptional and extremely unusual hardship, and the BIA erred in rejecting her claim of procedural error. (Keita v. Blanche, 8/4/26)
Deaths at Adult Detention Centers
AILA provides a continually updated list of press releases announcing deaths in adult immigration detention.
Featured Issue: Establishing a Fair and Independent Immigration Court
Immigration courts face a profound structural problem—they operate under DOJ and are therefore extremely vulnerable to political interference. This page collects resources, updates, and opportunities to advocate for establishing an independent immigration court with the Real Courts, Rule of Law Act.
CA5 Holds Equitable Tolling Is Not Appropriate and Dismisses Untimely Petition for Review
The court held that equitable tolling was not appropriate in the case and dismissed the petition for review of a reinstated removal order as untimely under INA §242(b)(1). (Saravia Martinez v. Blanche, 8/3/26)
CA2 Holds That IJs Need Not Make Adverse Credibility Finding Before Requiring Corroboration
The court held an IJ does not need to make an adverse credibility finding before requiring corroboration, that BIA forfeiture rulings are reviewed for abuse of discretion, and upheld the finding that the petitioner failed to establish a likelihood of torture. (Al Saidi v. Blanche, 8/3/26)
BIA Holds That Assisting a Child to Enter or Try to Enter in Violation of Law Triggers Good Moral Character Bar
The BIA held that the respondent was ineligible for cancellation because paying a smuggler to bring his child to the United States constituted assisting an alien to enter or try to enter unlawfully, triggering the good moral character bar. Matter of L–L–R–, 29 I&N Dec. 799 (BIA 2026)