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
DHS Announces Implementation of Visa Sanctions on Ghana
DHS announced, in coordination with DOS, the implementation of visa sanctions on Ghana due to a lack of cooperation in accepting their nationals ordered removed from the United States.
CA11 Upholds BIA Findings for CIMT, Controlled Substance, and Aggravated Felony Removal Based on Flunitrazepam Conviction
The court affirmed conviction was possession with intent to deliver; that BIA did not err in considering controlled substance violation despite lack of DHS cross-appeal; and that Flunitrazepam was in updated schedules and, thus, a controlled substance. (Bula Lopez v. Att’y Gen., 1/31/19)
AILA and NIJC Submit Amicus Brief Challenging the Auer Deference Rulings
AILA and the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC) submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in Kisor v. Wilkie, asking for the court of appeals judgment to be reversed and challenging the Auer doctrine that makes an agency’s interpretation of its own regulations controlling.
Acting AG Refers BIA Case to Himself and Invites Amicus Regarding Cancellation of Removal and Impact of Multiple DUIs
The Acting AG to review cancellation of removal eligibility and the impact of multiple convictions for driving while intoxicated or driving under the influence with regards to “good moral character.” Amicus briefs due by 2/25/19. Matter of Castillo-Perez, 27 I&N Dec. 495 (A.G. 2018)
BIA Holds New Hampshire Drug Statute Not an Aggravated Felony
Unpublished BIA decision holds that sale of a controlled substance under N.H. Rev. Stat. 318-8:26 is not an aggravated felony because it applies to gifting or offering a controlled substance. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Bah, 1/31/19)
DHS OIG Issues Report on ICE’s Failure to Fully Use Contracting Tools to Hold Detention Facility Contractors Accountable
DHS OIG’s report found ICE doesn’t adequately hold detention facility contractors accountable to performance standards and issues waivers seeking to exempt them from complying with certain standards instead of applying financial penalties for deficient conditions.
EOIR Releases Addendum to LOP Cohort Analysis of Phase I: Detention Length with DHS Data
EOIR released an addendum to its Phase I report on the Legal Orientation Program (LOP) as DHS provided EOIR with more granularly precise data regarding detention, including book-in and book-out dates.
EOIR Releases Phase II Analysis of Its Legal Orientation Program Cohort
EOIR released analysis is a follow-up to Phase I with additional analysis of when LOP services are provided, how long hearings last for LOP participants and non-LOP participants, and the difference in applications filed between LOP participants and non-LOP participants.
CA7 Grants Petition, Remands to BIA to Clarify Determination of Statutory Inadmissibility and, If Necessary, Reconsider Waiver Eligibility
The court found BIA record unclear regarding whether inadmissibility challenge was waived, and remanded for clarification; it also held waiver was considered under incorrect standard and should be reviewed under less stringent Lautenberg Amendment standard. (Ruderman v. Whitaker, 1/29/19)
CA9 Denies Petition for Review Citing Bermudez-Cota After NTA Didn’t Specify Time/Date
The court denied petitioner’s petition for review, holding that a NTA that does not specify the time/date vests an IJ with jurisdiction over the removal proceedings, so long as a notice specifying this information is sent to the individual in a timely manner. (Karingithi v. Whitaker, 1/28/19)
USCIS Releases Guidance for Implementing Section 235(b)(2)(C) of the INA and the Migrant Protection Protocols
USCIS released a memo with guidance to USCIS officers regarding the implementation of the Migrant Protection Protocols, including supporting the exercise of prosecutorial discretion by CBP.
Featured Issue: EOIR’s Decision to Transfer Mesa Verde Detention Facility Cases to Van Nuys Immigration Court
EOIR announced that as of February 3, 2020, the San Francisco Immigration Courts would stop hearing cases of detainees at the Mesa Verde Detention Facility in Bakersfield, California. Instead hundreds of cases will be moved to a new immigration court in Van Nuys that opened in November 2019.
DHS Releases Policy Guidance for Implementation of the Migrant Protection Protocols
DHS released guidance on the Migrant Protection Protocols including information on Section 235(b)(2)(C) as well as prosecutorial discretion and non-refoulement.
CA1 Finds Failure to Demonstrate Past Persecution or Fear of Future Persecution Based on Any Protected Ground
The court affirmed petitioner only raised “wealthy returning Guatemalans” as protected ground, which precedent says is not PSG; failed to raise family status as potential protected ground; and failed to establish any fear of torture for CAT remedy. (Batres Agustin v. Whitaker, 1/25/19)
CA11 Upholds Denial for Failure to Show Membership in a Cognizable Social Group
The court affirmed—whether under Chevron or de novo—that “Mexican citizens targeted by criminal groups because they have been in the US and they have families in the US” was not sufficiently particular nor distinct to be PSG; it also found no nexus. (Perez-Zenteno v. Att’y Gen., 1/25/19)
CA1 Holds Persecutor Bar Applies Even If Applicant Lacked Personal Motive When Participating in Persecution
The court upheld reversal of NACARA cancellation, finding persecutor bar does not require an assistant share persecutors’ motive; bar applies to one who knowingly aided persecution based on protected ground, regardless of whether they held “illicit motive.” (Alvarado v. Whitaker, 1/24/19)
CA9 Grants in Part and Remands for Proper Internal Relocation Analysis
The court found BIA erred by not conducting a sufficiently individualized relocation analysis, failing to consider petitioner’s safety if he continued expressing political opinion in relocated area and assuming he could stop his expression to avoid harm. (Singh v. Whitaker, 1/24/19)
DHS Releases Information Regarding Migrant Protection Protocols
DHS released information on the Migrant Protection Protocols, whereby certain individuals entering from Mexico may be returned to wait outside the U.S. for the duration of their immigration proceedings. Individuals will be given a Notice to Appear and returned to Mexico until their hearing date.
AILA Sends Oversight Letter to House Judiciary Committee
On 1/24/19, AILA sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee urging the committee to conduct hearings to hold USCIS accountable to its mission, halt the administration’s interference with immigration judges’ independence, and stop the violations of due process happening at the border.
AILA Policy Brief: Trump Shutdown Bill Full of Extreme Restrictionist Provisions
The “End the Shutdown and Secure the Border Act” bill should be rejected as representing hardline restrictionist views, rather than a genuine attempt at compromise. It would provide weak DACA and TPS protections, ramp up funding for enforcement, and all but eliminate asylum for certain minors.
Stokeling v. United States: Supreme Court Defines “Crime of Violence”
In Stokeling v. United States, the Supreme Court addressed the definition of a "crime of violence" under the ACCA. This advisory from the ILRC alerts public defenders and immigration advocates to possible immigration challenges caused by Stokeling, and defense strategies.
CA3 Holds Bad Advice from Non-Lawyer and Consequent Failure to Attend Removal Hearing Is Not Exceptional Circumstance
The court held missed removal hearing based on non-legal bad advice was neither extreme nor beyond petitioner’s control and affirmed in absentia order did not violate due process, distinguishing Cabrera-Perez (slight lateness vs. failure to appear). (Jean Louis v. Att’y Gen., 1/23/19)
CA7 Remands and Holds BIA Legally Erred by Denying MTR Based on Incorrect Determination
The court held BIA misapprehended the purpose of new evidence submitted in support of sua sponte MTR, which might have adversely affected its exercise of discretion when it denied relief since it left doubt as to whether the new evidence was fully considered. (Fuller v. Whitaker, 1/23/19)
CA6 Confirms Conviction for MI Felonious Assault Is Not Categorically CIMT
The court found BIA decision not entitled Chevron deference and reviewed it de novo to confirm, per Hanna, MCL §750.82 was not categorically CIMT, nor divisible per Harris; thus, conviction was not removable CIMT ground. (Molina Hernandez v. Whitaker, 1/23/19)
CA1 Upholds BIA Finding That Untimely MTR Was Not Amenable to Equitable Tolling for Failure to Diligently Pursue Relief
The court affirmed petitioner failed to exercise the due diligence necessary to equitably toll MTR; found evidence he was on notice of possible ineffective assistance claim prior to, and after, removal order, yet waited nearly five years to file MTR. (Medina v. Whitaker, 1/22/19)