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
CA9 Finds That IJ Erred by Refusing to Consider New Evidence at Petitioner’s Reasonable Fear Review Hearing
The court held that the IJ erred by failing to exercise discretion and, instead, automatically refusing to consider the petitioner’s new evidence of rape and country conditions in Peru on the erroneous belief that he lacked the discretion to consider it. (Dominguez Ojeda v. Garland, 8/29/24)
CA4 Says BIA Abused Its Discretion in Denying Reconsideration by Using More Burdensome Reopening Standard
The court held that the BIA abused its discretion in denying reconsideration of its earlier denial of petitioner’s motion to reopen his proceedings, concluding that BIA flouted its own precedents by ratifying the use of the more burdensome Coelho standard. (Mouns v. Garland, 8/28/24)
BIA Holds That INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i) Does Not Exclude Attempt Offenses
The BIA held that a conviction for an attempt to commit a crime may constitute a crime of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment, and found that respondent’s Texas conviction for attempted injury to a child rendered him removable. Matter of D. Rodriguez, 28 I&N Dec. 815 (BIA 2024)
CA1 Upholds Agency’s No-Nexus Finding as to Petitioner Whose PSG Was “Brazilian Women”
The court held that substantial evidence supported the agency’s conclusion that there was no nexus between the petitioner’s membership in her proposed particular social group (PSG) consisting of “Brazilian women” and the harm she suffered. (Soares da Silva Pazine v. Garland, 8/27/24)
CA9 Holds That INA §309(c) Requires Showing of Mother’s Continuous Physical Presence to Prove Child’s Citizenship
The court found that the district court did not clearly err in determining that the petitioner had failed to establish his mother’s continuous physical presence in the United States for one year, and thus had failed to prove that he was a U.S. citizen. (Meza-Carmona v. Garland, 8/26/24)
CA9 Holds That It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review Adverse Credibility Finding Underlying Denial of Petitioner’s Good Faith Marriage Waiver
The court held that, pursuant to recent Supreme Court precedent, it lacked jurisdiction under INA §242(a)(2)(B)(ii) to address the petitioner’s challenge to review the adverse credibility finding underlying the BIA’s denial of his good faith marriage waiver. (Zia v. Garland, 8/26/24)
What Project 2025 Says About Immigration
The American Immigration Council examines Project 2025, a restrictive immigration agenda for a potential second Trump term. The plan seeks to limit legal immigration, expand enforcement, and prepare for mass deportations, while restructuring agencies to centralize power and reduce transparency.
EOIR Updated Guidance for Receipts of DHS NTAs
EOIR provides updated standards regarding the receipt of Notices to Appear (NTAs) filed by DHS. Due to technology advances and the need for advanced filing of NTAs to allow IJs to manage their dockets, EOIR is updating its policy to require DHS to file NTAs closer in time to service.
AILA Sends Recommendations for Executive Action and Regulations on Immigration
AILA sent a letter to the White House with recommendations for executive action and regulations on immigration to ensure that the positive policy changes made during the Biden Administration are codified or otherwise made permanent.
CA5 Remands Asylum Claim of Nurse Who Was Threatened by Cameroonian Military for Treating Separatist Fighters
The court found that substantial evidence did not support the BIA’s determination that the petitioner, a nurse who asserted that the Cameroonian military threatened to kill him because he treated separatist fighters, had failed to prove past persecution. (Aben v. Garland, 8/20/24)
EOIR Announces EOIR University
EOIR has launched EOIR University, a new training facility aimed at enhancing immigration representation. Part of the Access EOIR Initiative, this no-cost program offers training for both aspiring and current legal professionals.
CA1 Holds That BIA May Not Give Substantial Weight to Police Report Without a Conviction or Corroborating Evidence
The court vacated the BIA’s denial of the petitioner’s adjustment of status application and remanded, holding that, in denying discretionary relief, the BIA may not give substantial weight to a police report in the absence of a conviction or corroborating evidence. (Rosa v. Garland, 8/16/24)
CA9 Finds It Lacked Jurisdiction to Review BIA’s Denial of Petitioner’s Motions for Remand and Administrative Closure
The court denied the petition for rehearing en banc and issued an amended opinion dismissing, for lack of jurisdiction, a petition for review of the BIA’s denial of the petitioner’s motions for remand and administrative closure. (Tapia Coria v. Garland, 3/19/24, amended 8/16/24)
CA7 Concludes That Agency Had Authority under INA §240B to Promulgate Regulation Limiting Eligibility for Voluntary Departure
The court held that the agency did not exceed its authority in promulgating 8 CFR §1240.26(i), which restricts the ability of noncitizens to gain voluntary departure if they file a judicial challenge to their underlying order of removal. (Bernardo-De La Cruz v. Garland, 8/15/24)
CA1 Finds No Indication BIA Ignored Evidence Concerning Petitioner’s Medically Fragile Child Submitted with Motion to Reopen
The court held that, although the BIA did not mention the medical challenges of petitioner’s third child in its decision, there was no indication in its denial of petitioner’s motion to reopen sua sponte that it was unaware of the evidence petitioner submitted. (Charles v. Garland, 8/15/24)
The Case Management Pilot Program
AILA, Women's Refugee Commission, Global Refuge, Lutheran Social Services of the National Capital Area, and International Rescue Committee published a joint backgrounder on the Case Management Pilot Program (CMPP).
Practice Advisory: “Particularly Serious Crime” Bars on Asylum and Withholding of Removal
IDP and HIRC provide a practice advisory with legal standards and sample case law determinations on the "particularly serious crime” bars on asylum and withholding of removal.
CA1 Upholds Asylum Denial as to Salvadoran Petitioner Threatened by MS-13 Gang Members Conducting Drug Deals
The court found that substantial evidence supported the IJ’s and BIA’s determination that petitioner’s status as a “single, Salvadoran mother with no familial protection” was not a central reason for her persecution, and thus upheld the denial of asylum. (Lemus-Aguilar v. Garland, 8/12/24)
CA1 Upholds Denial of Asylum as to Ecuadorian Petitioners Targeted Due to Personal Land-Related Dispute
The court held that the petitioners had failed to establish a nexus between their membership in their proposed particular social group (PSG) consisting of the “Penafiel-Peralta Nuclear Family” and the persecution they suffered in Ecuador. (Penafiel-Peralta, et al. v. Garland, 8/12/24)
CA6 Says BIA Failed to Conduct Proper Circularity Analysis as to Petitioner’s PSG
The court held that, reviewing the record as a whole, the particular facts of the petitioner’s case showed that her proposed particular social group (PSG) consisting of “victims of domestic violence” was not circular. (Tista-Ruiz de Ajualip, et al. v. Garland, 8/9/24)
CA1 Finds Indonesian Petitioner Who Once Provided Material Support to Foreign Terrorist Organization Ineligible for Asylum
The court held that the BIA and IJ did not violate the Indonesian petitioner’s due process rights by finding that he was ineligible for asylum because he had once provided material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization called Jemaah Islamiya. (Jani v. Garland, 7/29/24)
AILA and Partners Submit Amicus on the "Realistic Probability" Test
AILA and partners submit an amicus brief to the Third Circuit, arguing that the "realistic probability" test should not apply in every categorical approach case because there are cases in which the statute of conviction is, on its face, broader than the generic federal offense.
CA4 Holds That Indian Petitioner’s Involuntary Commitment and Forced Electroconvulsive Therapy Did Not Amount to Persecution
The court held that the involuntary hospitalization of, and administration of electroconvulsive therapy to, the Indian petitioner, who had “a well-documented history of debilitating and dangerous mental illnesses,” did not constitute persecution for asylum purposes. (Joshi v. Garland, 8/8/24)
CA1 Upholds Adverse Credibility Finding as to Brazilian Petitioner Threatened by Drug-Dealing Neighbor
The court held that, in light of the inconsistencies between petitioner’s statements and her testimony, the IJ and BIA reasonably concluded that petitioner’s testimony was not credible found she had offered no adequate corroborating evidence. (De Oliveira Rodrigues v. Garland, 8/8/24)
Featured Issue: It's Time to Change the Lozada Standard
Use this page to learn more about the impact of the Matter of Lozada and how AILA wants the Lozada standard changed.