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 Violation of Minnesota’s Fifth-Degree Possession Statute Is a Removable Offense
The court denied the petitions for review, finding that the petitioners, who had pleaded guilty to possessing methamphetamine in violation of Minnesota’s fifth-degree possession statute, were removable under INA §237(a)(2)(B)(i). (Bannister v. Barr, 5/26/20)
BIA Finds EWIs Cannot Be Charged with Inadmissibility Under INA §212(a)(7)
Unpublished BIA decision holds that INA §212(a)(7)(A)(i) is only applicable to respondents who seek admission at a port of entry, as distinct from those who enter without inspection. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Ortiz Orellana, 5/26/20)
BIA Rescinds In Absentia Order Against Respondent Who Reported to DHS
Unpublished BIA decision rescinds in absentia order against respondent who appeared at prior hearings and reported to DHS the day after being ordered removed in absentia. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Martinez-Polio, 5/22/20)
Practice Pointer: Resources for Removal Defense During COVID-19
This practice pointer compiles key resources from AILA and its partners for AILA members practicing removal defense during COVID-19, including local court practices and information on practicing removal defense remotely, filing motions to continue, and getting clients released from detention.
EOIR Director Rules on Requests for Reconsideration of Accreditation Denials
EOIR Director reviewed a request for reconsideration of accreditation denial and ruled on various issues related to requests for reconsideration, including the appropriate legal standard for evaluating them. Matter of Bay Area Legal Services, Inc., Applicant, 27 I&N Dec. 837 (DIR 2020).
EOIR Announces Four New Assistant Chief Immigration Judges
EOIR announced four new assistant chief immigration judges (ACIJs). The ACIJs have been assigned to the following immigration courts: San Francisco; Arlington; Atlanta – W. Peachtree Street; and New York – Broadway. Notice includes the new ACIJs’ biographical information.
CA1 Finds Petitioner Pardoned by Connecticut Board of Pardons and Paroles Was Eligible for a Pardon Waiver
The court held that the BIA erred when it found that the pardon issued to the petitioner by the Connecticut Board of Pardons and Paroles was not effective for purposes of establishing entitlement to a waiver of removal under INA §237(a)(2)(A)(vi). (Thompson v. Barr, 5/21/20)
ICE Issues Comment on Release of Juveniles from Family Residential Centers
ICE issued a comment regarding media coverage of its use of a form to make individual parole determinations with respect to juveniles held in custody at FRCs with their parents. ICE stated that the form was not a legally binding document and does not convey any legal implications on the family unit.
AILA Hosts Telebriefing on the Treatment of Immigrants in Detention During the COVID-19 Pandemic
On May 21, 2020, AILA and the Council, through the Immigration Justice Campaign, hosted a telebriefing discussing the treatment of immigrants in detention. The briefing highlighted the U.S. government’s failure to take urgent action to stem the spread of COVID-19 within ICE detention facilities.
BIA Rescinds In Absentia Order Where Hearing Was Not Reflected on EOIR Hotline
Unpublished BIA decision rescinds in absentia order where EOIR hotline did not reflect the existence of a hearing and the DHS attorney confirmed that the respondent was not on DHS's docket on the date she was ordered removed. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Opondo, 5/21/20)
Practice Alert: ICE to Provide 520 Free Phone Minutes Per Month for Individuals Detained During the COVID-19 Pandemic
AILA alerts members that ICE officials communicated to congressional staff on May 4, 2020, that it had committed to providing 520 free minutes per month for each person in ICE detention. On May 19, 2020, members of Congress sent a letter urging the agency to quickly implement its commitment.
CA7 Says BIA Held Petitioner to Unduly Demanding Burden on Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Allegation
The court found that the BIA should not have faulted petitioner for failing to provide his initial counsel with information significant to a potential U visa application, but denied petition for review because he could not prove prejudice. (Alvarez-Espino v. Barr, 3/6/20, amended 5/20/20)
Citing COVID-19, USBP and ICE Ramp Up Repatriation Flights to Mexico
CBP announced that the USBP San Diego Sector (SDC), in collaboration with ICE, will begin transporting Mexican nationals with repatriations back to their country of origin via air flight. Per CBP, the goal of these repatriation flights is to reduce the spread of COVID-19 into the United States.
Practice Pointer: Motion to Continue Proceedings During COVID-19
The AILA EOIR Liaison Committee provides this practice pointer as a resource for those seeking to continue proceedings where current circumstances interfere with the ability to timely produce quality work in a professional and ethical matter.
CA6 Holds BIA Erred in Finding That Asylum-Seeking Mayan Indigenous Woman Could Reasonably Relocate Within Guatemala
The court found that the BIA’s conclusion that the government showed by a preponderance of the evidence that the Guatemalan petitioner could internally relocate and that it would be reasonable for her to do so was not supported by substantial evidence. (Juan Antonio v. Barr, 5/19/20)
AILA and Partners Submit Amicus Brief on the Burden of Proof in Immigration Bond Hearings
AILA and partners submitted an amicus brief in Brito v. Barr arguing that the government bears the burden of proof in immigration bond proceedings and that the court should resolve the questions before it without deference to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).
CA6 Says Withholding Applicants Must Be Given the Chance to Explain Why Corroborative Evidence Is Not Reasonably Available
Granting the petition for review of the BIA’s denial of withholding of removal, the court found that the IJ and BIA erred in failing to give the petitioner an opportunity to explain why he could not reasonably obtain certain corroborative evidence. (Guzman-Vazquez v. Barr, 5/18/20)
CA9 Finds It Lacks Jurisdiction to Consider Petitioner’s “Settled Course” Argument Where BIA Denied Sua Sponte Reconsideration
The court held that the petitioner’s “settled course of adjudication” argument was barred by the court’s general rule that it lacks jurisdiction to review claims that the BIA should have exercised its sua sponte power in a given case. (Lona v. Barr, 5/15/20)
CA3 Holds BIA Erred in Retroactively Applying Matter of Diaz-Lizarraga to Find Petitioner Removable
The court granted the petition for review, holding that the BIA erred in retroactively applying the new standard for theft-related crimes involving moral turpitude (CIMTs) that it had promulgated in Matter of Diaz-Lizarraga to the petitioner. (Francisco-Lopez v. Att’y Gen., 5/15/20)
CA1 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Salvadoran Petitioner Where IJ and BIA Relied on Boston’s “Gang Assessment Database”
The court upheld the BIA’s denial of asylum, finding that the IJ’s adverse credibility determination was supported by substantial evidence, and that the introduction of law enforcement gang database records did not violate the petitioner’s due process rights. (Diaz Ortiz v. Barr, 5/15/20)
CA10 Says Post-Departure Bar Does Not Eliminate an IJ’s Jurisdiction to Move Sua Sponte to Reopen Removal Proceedings
The court held that the BIA erred in ruling that the IJ lacked jurisdiction to move sua sponte to reopen petitioner’s removal proceedings, finding that the post-departure bar does not apply to the IJ’s own sua sponte authority to reopen removal proceedings. (Reyes-Vargas v. Barr, 5/14/20)
BIA Reopens Sua Sponte Because Florida Theft Statute Is No Longer a CIMT
Unpublished BIA decision reopens proceedings sua sponte upon finding theft under Fla. Stat. 812.014 is no longer a CIMT under Descamps v. U.S., 133 S. Ct. 2276 (2013), and Matter of Diaz-Lizarraga, 26 I&N Dec. 847 (BIA 2016). Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Persad, 5/14/20)
DHS Issues Privacy Impact Assessment for ICE’s Use of Facial Recognition Services
DHS issued a PIA on ICE HSI’s use of facial recognition services, including the submission of digital images to government agencies and commercial vendors to compare against their digital image galleries, and HSI’s subsequent use of potential candidate matches to produce investigative leads.
CRS Releases Legal Sidebar on Supreme Court’s Decision in Barton v. Barr
CRS released a legal sidebar examining the Supreme Court’s decision in Barton v. Barr, in which the court held that the commission of certain crimes set forth in §212 of the INA could render an LPR ineligible for cancellation of removal if committed with seven years of the LPR’s admission.
CA5 Upholds BIA’s Asylum Denial to Mexican Petitioner Whose Father Was Extorted by Zetas Drug Cartel
Finding that substantial evidence supported BIA’s denial of asylum, the court held that petitioner had failed to meet his burden to establish that it would be unreasonable for him to relocate to another part of Mexico, away from his father’s extortionists. (Munoz-Granados v. Barr, 5/12/20)