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 Holds That Actual Protection Order Need Not Be in Record to Show Removability under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(ii)
The court held that a petitioner found removable under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(ii) for violating a no-contact order need not have the actual protection order in the record, where other evidence proved the statutory elements by clear and convincing evidence. (Tiah v. Blanche, 6/8/26)
Vote Recommendation: AILA Urges the House to Vote NO on the FY26 Budget Reconciliation Bill
On 6/8/26, AILA sent a vote recommendation to the House urging it to not provide ICE and Border Patrol an additional $70 billion in funding through the FY26 Budget Reconciliation bill after it passed the Senate on 6/5/26.
CA4 Holds New Jersey Conviction for Storing Child Sexual Abuse Material on a File-Sharing Program Was Categorically a Crime of Child Abuse
The court denied and dismissed in part the petition for review, holding that petitioner’s New Jersey conviction for knowingly storing child sexual abuse material on a file-sharing program categorically qualified as a crime of child abuse under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i). (Uddin v. Blanche, 6/5/26)
BIA Holds That “Social Distinction” Element of a PSG Must Generally Be Measured on a Countrywide Basis
The BIA held that the “social distinction” element of a particular social group (PSG) must generally be measured on a countrywide basis, rather than from the perspective of a neighborhood or other limited geographic location within a country. Matter of S–E–M–Z–, 29 I&N Dec. 680 (BIA 2026)
BIA Holds That Respondent’s Federal Health Care Fraud Conviction Was for a Particularly Serious Crime
The BIA dismissed the respondent’s appeal, holding that his conviction for health care fraud under 18 USC §1347 was for a particularly serious crime barring asylum and withholding of removal, and affirming the denial of CAT protection. Matter of J–O–A–, 29 I&N Dec. 672 (BIA 2026)
BIA Finds Respondent Not Credible and Ineligible for Asylum, Withholding, and CAT Due to Inconsistencies Related to Identity
The BIA held the IJ properly found the respondent was not credible, and ultimately ineligible for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), due to various inconsistencies related to his identity. Matter of I–S–M–, 29 I&N Dec. 811 (BIA 2026)
Vote Recommendation: AILA Urges Congress to Vote NO on the FY26 Budget Reconciliation Bill
On 6/3/26, AILA sent a vote recommendation to Congress urging it to not provide ICE and Border Patrol an additional $70 billion in funding through the FY26 Budget Reconciliation bill.
CA1 Vacates Orders for Failing to State with Sufficient Particularity Whether BIA Addressed Imputed-Mungiki Persecution Arguments
The court held that the BIA’s orders dismissing the petitioner’s appeal did not state with sufficient particularity their basis for rejecting his arguments that Kenyan police would persecute him as a presumed Mungiki based on his family status or Kikuyu ethnicity. (Muchiri v. Blanche, 6/3/26)
NJ Spotlight News: ‘Black box’: Trump Administration Moves to Wipe Out ICE Watchdog
The Administration’s latest budget request to Congress would cut all funding and staff for the Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman. AILA Senior Director of Government Relations Greg Chen emphasized that as the detained population has exploded, DHS oversight agencies are being wiped out.
AILA Statement Submitted to House Judiciary Committee: Oppose H.R. 175 “Deport Alien Gang Members Act”
On 6/2/26, AILA submitted a statement to the House Judiciary Committee opposing H.R. 175, the “Deport Alien Gang Members Act.” The statement highlights that instead of improving public safety, the bill would result in ICE targeting people with no gang ties who pose no threat to public safety.
BIA Holds That Prior UAC Designation and Approved SIJ Petition Do Not Give IJs Bond Authority over Applicants for Admission
The BIA held that neither a previous designation as an unaccompanied child (UAC) nor an approved special immigrant juvenile (SIJ) petition gives an IJ authority to redetermine the custody status of a noncitizen who has not been admitted. Matter of N–A–G–C–, 29 I&N Dec. 662 (BIA 2026)
CA7 Holds Illinois Battery Conviction Against Family Members Is a Crime of Domestic Violence and Sanctions Counsel for AI-Hallucinated Briefs
The court held that the petitioner’s conviction in Illinois for battery against his mother and siblings was a crime of domestic violence barring cancellation of removal, and sanctioned counsel for signing and submitting briefs containing AI hallucinations. (Perez-Castillo v. Blanche, 6/1/26)
CA4 Holds That BIA Reversibly Erred by Treating Petitioner’s “Salvadoran Women” Social Group as Raised for the First Time on Appeal
The court held the BIA reversibly erred by treating petitioner’s “Salvadoran women” particular social group (PSG) as raised for the first time on appeal and declining to reach its merits, requiring remand, while denying her remaining asylum and CAT claims. (Alvarado-Paz v. Blanche, 6/1/26)
CA10 Holds Detention, Pro Se Status, and Limited Resources Were Not Extraordinary Circumstances Warranting Equitable Tolling
The court upheld the BIA’s denial of the motion to reopen as untimely, holding that the petitioner’s lack of counsel and limited resources while detained were not extraordinary circumstances warranting equitable tolling. (Bonilla-Espinoza v. Blanche, 6/1/26)
BIA Holds That Harm Suffered While a Minor Is Not Necessarily Persecution and Pattern or Practice Claims Require an Objective Showing
The BIA held that harm suffered while a minor does not necessarily constitute persecution, and a pattern or practice withholding claim still requires an objective showing of a clear probability of persecution and has no subjective component. Matter of I–U–V–, 29 I&N Dec. 816 (BIA 2026)
CA6 Holds Government’s Cross-Examination Satisfied Opportunity to Explain Missing Corroboration and Upholds Denial of Cancellation
The court held that cross-examination by government counsel gave the petitioner an adequate opportunity to explain his missing corroboration, and that he did not show the required hardship for cancellation of removal purposes. (Nwosu v. Blanche, 5/29/26)
CA8 Upholds Denial of Cancellation Under Where Petitioner’s U.S.-Citizen Children Would Retain Family Support
The court held the Guatemalan petitioner had no liberty interest in the discretionary relief of cancellation of removal and that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s finding of no exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to her U.S.-citizen children. (Lopez-Vasquez v. Blanche, 5/29/26)
CA1 Holds That BIA Abused Its Discretion in Denying Motion to Reopen Where Counsel Failed to File Brief and IJ Failed to Develop Record
The court held that the BIA abused its discretion in denying the motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance where it gave no explanation for finding noncompliance with Lozada and overlooked an argument that the IJ failed to develop the record. (Buckley v. Blanche, 5/29/26)
CA3 Holds It Has Jurisdiction to Review Withholding and CAT Denials Absent a Challenge to a Final Order of Removal
The court held it has jurisdiction under INA §242(a)(1) to review withholding and CAT denials absent a challenge to a final order of removal, denied the petitioner’s CAT claim as speculative, and left the withholding denial intact by an equally divided court. (Laureano v. Att’y Gen., 5/29/26)
EOIR Policy Memorandum (PM) on Cancellation of PMs 21-17, 21-19, 21-20, 21-21, and 21-22
EOIR Director Daren K. Margolin issued policy memorandum (PM) 26-05 cancelling PMs 21-17, 21-19, 21-20, 21-21, and 21-22, all of which cancelled earlier policy memoranda. However, this memorandum does not reinstate those earlier policy memoranda.
CA1 Upholds Cancellation Denial After Finding Medical and Mental Health Conditions Did Not Establish Exceptional and Extremely Unusual Hardship
The court held that the agency did not err in denying cancellation where petitioner failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his two U.S. citizen daughters, one with anxiety and sleepwalking issues and the other with eye conditions. (Argueta Castillo v. Blanche, 5/27/26)
BIA Holds That Government’s Deference to Tribal Conflict-Resolution Mechanisms Does Not Show It Is Unable or Unwilling to Control Persecutors
The BIA held that although a government may generally defer to tribal mechanisms for resolving tribal conflict, doing so does not indicate the government is unable or unwilling to control persecutors within a tribe. Matter of A–H–D–, 29 I&N Dec. 642 (BIA 2026)
CA2 Remands Where BIA Failed to Make But-For Eligibility Determination Before Applying Material Support Bar
The court held that the BIA must determine whether a petitioner would be eligible for asylum or withholding of removal but for the material support bar, because USCIS will not consider granting a waiver absent such a determination. (Sufiyan v. Blanche, 3/12/26, amended 5/26/26)
EOIR Policy Memorandum (PM) 26-04 Canceling PM 20-16, PM 20-06, and DM 22-08
EOIR Director Daren Margolin issued policy memorandum (PM) 26-04 canceling PM 20-16, OCAHO Settlement Officer Program; PM 20-06, Section 7611 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2020, Public Law 116-92; and director’s memorandum (DM) 22-08, The Asylum Procedures Rule.
BIA Holds That “Mexican Men with Schizoaffective Disorder" Is Not a Cognizable PSG
The BIA held that the group "Mexican men with Schizoaffective Disorder," defined only by such diagnosis, is not cognizable as a particular social group (PSG) under the INA. Matter of L–A–D–, 29 I&N Dec. 634 (BIA 2026)