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
ICE Provides Alternatives to Detention Frequently Asked Questions
ICE provides Q&As related to alternatives to detention, topics include Tech and Privacy Questions; Legal Access Questions; Enrollment, Escalation, and Termination Questions; Case Management Questions; Compliance Questions; and Other Questions.
Practice Alert: ICE Issues Standard Operating Procedures For Detention Closures
On March 2, 2022, ICE issued a new Standard Operation Procedure (SOP) for detention closures. This practice alert summarizes key SOP procedures including notification to counsel, affirmative review of detained cases, and a 10-day pause on transfers to submit release request.
Practice Alert: Prosecutorial Discretion Local Guidance
AILA provides a practice alert to notify members that after the district court nationwide vacatur of the Mayorkas memo took effect on 6/25/22, local Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) on prosecutorial discretion are not currently in effect. ICE has updated its website to reflect the same.
CA3 Concludes That Removal Order Is Not Final Until Decision Has Been Made on Request for Withholding of Removal
The court held that INA §242(b)(1)’s 30-day filing deadline to seek judicial review of a removal order is nonjurisdictional, and that a removal order is not final until a decision has been made on a noncitizen’s request for withholding of removal. (Inestroza-Tosta v. Att’y Gen., 6/21/24)
CA4 Upholds Denial of CAT Deferral to Salvadoran Petitioner with Gang-Related Tattoos and Criminal Record
The court held that the IJ did not ignore experts’ testimony and the agency applied the correct legal standard in finding that petitioner had not shown he was likely to suffer torture in El Salvador due to his gang-related tattoos and criminal record. (Lopez-Sorto v. Garland, 5/31/24)
CA8 Finds That Petitioner’s Conviction in Iowa Did Not Qualify as Sexual Abuse of a Minor under INA §101(a)(43)(A)
Granting the petition for review, the court held that the petitioner’s Iowa conviction for knowingly purchasing or possessing visual depiction of a minor engaging in a prohibited sexual act or the simulation of a prohibited sexual act was not an aggravated felony. (Huynh v. Garland, 5/28/24)
CA9 Rejects Petitioner’s Challenge to Authenticity and Reliability of Government Exhibits Relied on for Removability Ruling
The court held that the BIA and IJ did not err by admitting exhibits the government offered to prove petitioner’s removability, finding that petitioner failed to preserve most of his authentication challenges and that the record supported the documents’ reliability. (Smith v. Garland, 6/3/24)
CA11 Upholds Withholding of Removal and CAT Denial to Transgender Petitioner from Mexico
The court held that the petitioner failed to show a likelihood of future persecution or torture in Mexico based on transgender status, and thus upheld the BIA’s denial of their claims for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). (A.P.A. v. Garland, 6/6/24)
Practice Alert: New “Recent Arrivals” Docket in Immigration Court
AILA provides a practice alert on the Recent Arrivals docket (RA docket), which will initially operate in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City. Immigration courts will begin hearing the RA docket the last week of June 2024, and other cases may be rescheduled due to this docket.
Practice Pointer: Advocating in Immigration Court Where OPLA Doesn’t Appear or Does Not Respond
Practitioners have seen increasing instances of OPLA (1) not appearing at immigration court hearings and (2) not filing responses to noncitizens’ motions and other filings with the immigration court. This practice pointer discusses strategies for AILA members to consider in light of this reality.
BIA Holds That Rape Clearly Rises to Level of Torture and Can Never Be a Lawful Sanction under the CAT
The BIA held that rape is sufficiently severe to constitute torture and can never be a lawful sanction under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), and remanded the respondent’s case to a different IJ based on an appearance of bias. Matter of H–C–R–C–, 28 I&N Dec. 809 (BIA 2024)
Think Immigration: I Wish People Understood that Immigration Court Is an Unlevel Playing Field Where You Face Life and Death Decisions
As part of our “One Thing” series, Evangeline Chan explains that the one thing she wished people understood about immigration is that immigration court is structurally different than other courts and we need an Article 1 independent immigration court to ensure justice.
EOIR Issues Operating Policies and Procedures on Classified Information in Immigration Court Proceedings
EOIR issued Operating Policies and Procedures Memorandum 24-01 on the proper handling of classified information in immigration court proceedings and within immigration courts.
CA4 Finds IJ Failed to Consider Relevant Evidence Regarding Family Hardship in Denying Cancellation of Removal
The court held that the IJ failed to adequately consider the evidence presented to him—specifically, material portions of a therapist’s letter discussing the petitioner’s daughter’s mental health and how the petitioner’s removal would impact her daughter. (Garcia Cortes v. Garland, 6/17/24)
CA9 Finds BIA Erred in Requiring Petitioner to Have Applied for Voluntary Departure Before IJ But Error Was Harmless
The court held that, in light of Posos-Sanchez v. Garland, the BIA erred in denying the petitioner’s motion to remand on the basis that she had not previously applied for voluntary departure before the IJ, but found that the BIA’s error was harmless. (Gonzalez-Lara v. Garland, 6/17/24)
District Court Temporarily Blocks Iowa Law That Would Allow State Authorities to Imprison and Deport Anyone Previously Removed
The district court granted the motions for preliminary injunction filed by the federal government and Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice (MMJ) plaintiffs in their respective cases, concluding that SF 2340 is preempted in its entirety by federal law. (United States v. Iowa, et al., 6/17/24)
SCOTUS Finds Two Types of “Written Notice” as Adequate Even if First Notice Didn't Include Time or Place
In Campos-Chaves v. Garland, SCOTUS found that the noncitizens received adequate notice of the removal hearings that they missed and at which they were ordered removed so that they can’t seek rescission of their removal orders (issued in their absence) on the basis of defective notice.
AILA President: Supreme Court Decision in Campos-Chaves Gives Government Free Pass and Undermines Due Process
AILA President Kelli Stump responded to today’s SCOTUS ruling in Campos-Chaves v. Garland, highlighting that “this is yet another example of why we so desperately need an independent immigration court in order to have any chance of fairness and justice.”
Key Takeaways from the Annual Conference ICE Open Forum
The ICE Liaison Committee provides key takeaways from the ICE Open Forum Panel, which was held during the AILA Annual Conference on June 14, 2024.
Key Takeaways from the CIS Ombudsman Open Forum 2024 AILA Annual Conference
AILA’s High Impact Adjudication Assistance (HIAA) Committee shares five key takeaways from the CIS Ombudsman Open Forum at the AILA Annual Conference on June 14, 2024.
Featured Issue: Border Processing and Asylum
This featured issue page provides updates, analyses, and other resources on border processing and asylum policies, and AILA’s advocacy on the creation of a humane and fair border processing system for all individuals arriving at our southern border seeking safety.
Think Immigration: The Next Best Thing to Attending the AILA Law Journal Symposium Is Reading This Issue
AILA Law Journal Editor-in-Chief Cyrus Mehta runs through the pieces in this special edition of the journal which focuses on the AILA Law Journal’s first-ever symposium held this Spring on “Shaping Immigration Policy Through the Federal Courts.”
AILA and the Council Comment on the Application of Certain Mandatory Bars in Fear Screenings
AILA and the American Immigration Council submitted a joint comment on NPRM, Application of Certain Mandatory Bars in Fear Screenings.
CA1 Concludes That Petitioner Detained Nearly Four Years While Seeking CAT Relief Was Not Entitled to Habeas Relief
The court affirmed the district court’s denial of habeas relief, finding that the petitioner had not exhausted his administrative remedies to prevent removal, but rather was being detained because his Convention Against Torture (CAT) proceedings remained pending. (G.P. v. Garland, 6/11/24)
CA4 Upholds Denial of Asylum and Related Relief to Salvadoran Petitioners Who Were Abused by Maternal Uncle
The court held that substantial evidence supported the agency’s finding that petitioners had failed to show the requisite nexus between the harm they suffered from their uncle and their membership in a social group consisting of “children of their mother.” (Diaz-Hernandez v. Garland, 6/10/24)