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
CA3 Says Special Courts-Martial Convictions Constitute Aggravated Felonies Under the INA
The court dismissed the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction, finding that convictions by special courts-martial are convictions for purposes of INA §101(a)(48)(A), and that petitioner was removable for having committed an aggravated felony (Gourzong v. Att'y Gen., 6/14/16)
CA9 Grants Rehearing En Banc in Case Involving HIV-Positive Asylum Seeker from Mexico
The court granted rehearing en banc to revisit its prior decision upholding BIA's denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief to petitioner, a citizen of Mexico who had sought relief based on his sexual orientation and HIV-positive status. (Bringas-Rodriguez v. Lynch, 6/14/16)
BIA Finds EWI Not Inadmissible Due to Subsequent Parole From Within Country
Unpublished BIA decision holds that respondent who entered the country without inspection before being paroled to testify in criminal prosecution was not inadmissible under INA 212(a)(6)(A)(i) nor ineligible to adjust status under INA 245(a). Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Mora, 6/14/16)
BIA Says Respondent with PTSD Established Extraordinary Circumstances for Delay in Filing Asylum Application
Unpublished BIA decision finds that the IJ erred in concluding that respondent, whose PTSD was repeatedly triggered and exacerbated, did not demonstrate extraordinary circumstances sufficient to excuse the one-year asylum filing deadline. Courtesy of Ann Wennerstrom. (Matter of –, 6/14/16)
DHS CRCL FY2015 Annual Report to Congress
DHS CRCL FY2015 Annual Report to Congress detailing CRCL’s priorities and activities in FY2015, including preventing terrorism and enhancing security, securing and managing U.S. borders, and enforcing and administering U.S. immigration laws.
CA3 Says PA Conviction for Making Terroristic Threats Is Categorically a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude
The court held that petitioner’s Pennsylvania conviction for making terroristic threats was categorically a crime of moral turpitude, because a threat communicated with a specific intent to terrorize is an act “accompanied by a vicious motive or a corrupt mind.” (Javier v. Att'y Gen, 6/9/16)
BIA Finds There Is No Duress Exception to the “Material Support Bar”
The BIA held that the “material support bar” in INA §212(a)(3)(B)(iv)(VI) does not include an implied exception for a noncitizen who has provided material support to a terrorist organization under duress. Matter of M-H-Z-, 26 I&N Dec. 757 (BIA 2016)
BIA Solicits Amicus Briefs on Definition of “Minor” for Exception to One-Year Asylum Deadline
The BIA invites interested members of the public to file amicus curiae briefs on the definition of the term “minor” for purposes of establishing “extraordinary circumstances” that would constitute an exception to the one-year filing deadline for asylum applications. Briefs are due by 7/11/16.
CA1 Upholds Denial of Chinese Asylum Applicants’ Second Motion to Reopen
The court denied the petition for review, concluding that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in holding that the petitioners failed to make an adequate showing of a material change in country circumstances, and thus that their second motion to reopen was time-barred. (Chen v. Lynch, 6/9/16)
BIA Reverses Denial of Unopposed Motion to Terminate Based on Post-Conviction Relief
Unpublished BIA decision reverses denial of unopposed motion to terminate where both parties agreed that vacatur of criminal conviction was based on ineffective assistance of the respondent’s criminal attorney. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Palmer, 6/9/16)
CA5 Says BIA Failed to Consider All Relevant Evidence Concerning Whether Petitioner Received Notice
The court granted the petition for review and remanded, holding that because the BIA concluded that petitioner failed to rebut the presumption of notice without considering all relevant evidence, it abused its discretion in denying the motion to reopen. (Torres Hernandez v. Lynch, 6/8/16)
CA6 Says Jury Nullification Cannot Be Considered in Deciding Whether Petitioner Has Demonstrated Prejudice
The court held that jury nullification may not be considered when evaluating whether a petitioner has shown prejudice under the Strickland v. Washington test for ineffective assistance of counsel claims. (Lee v. United States, 6/8/16)
Senate Democrats Urge President to End the Deportation Raids
On 6/8/16, Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) led 24 Senate Democrats in urging the President to end the deportation raids targeting Central American families and unaccompanied minors; and consider designating Guatemala, and re-designating El Salvador and Honduras for TPS.
CA8 Says Salvadoran Petitioner Failed to Show Nexus Between Membership in PSG and Persecution
The court denied the petition for review, holding that, assuming that petitioner’s proposed family-based groups are cognizable, particular social groups (PSGs), he failed to show a nexus between his membership in the groups and the persecution he suffered. (Aguinada-Lopez v. Lynch, 6/7/16)
CA3 Says Federal Regulation That Limits Adjustment of Status for K-4 Visa Holders Is Invalid
The court held that 8 CFR § 245.1(i), which effectively bars any child with a K-4 visa who was between the age of 18 and 21 at the time of his or her parent’s marriage to a U.S. citizen from adjusting status without first returning overseas, is invalid. (Cen v. Att'y Gen., 6/6/16)
CA8 Says Petitioner’s 2004 Arkansas Assault Conviction Is a CIMT
The court denied the petition for review, holding that the petitioner’s 2004 Arkansas conviction for assault in the first degree was categorically a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT). (Estrada-Rodriguez v. Lynch, 6/6/16)
BIA Reverses Denial of Continuance to Seek U Visa Certification
Unpublished BIA decision reverses denial of continuance to seek law enforcement certification necessary to apply for U visa where a crime occurred only two weeks prior to the hearing. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Patel, 6/3/16)
BIA Remands to Allow U Visa Derivative to Renew Request for a Continuance
Unpublished BIA decision applies Matter of Sanchez Sosa to U visa derivatives with respect to continuances in immigration court, and remands the record to the IJ for the respondent to renew his request for a continuance and administrative closure. Courtesy of Nicolas Chavez.
DOJ OIL June 2016 Litigation Bulletin
The DOJ OIL Immigration Litigation Bulletin for June 2016, with articles on United States v. Texas and Mathis v. United States, as well as summaries of circuit court decisions for June 2016.
CA8 Finds BIA Did Not Abuse Its Discretion in Denying Motion to Reopen in Absentia Removal Order
The court upheld the denial of the petitioner’s motion to reopen the in absentia removal order entered against him, finding that the petitioner had failed to rebut the presumption that the Notice of Hearing mailed by DHS was delivered to him. (Diaz v. Lynch, 6/1/16)
CA9 Finds Remand Not Justified Where ICE Reinstated Prior Expedited Removal Order Despite Intervening PD Memos
The court concluded that remand to ICE for reconsideration of its decision to reinstate the petitioner’s prior expedited removal order was not justified, despite intervening agency memoranda pertaining to the exercise of prosecutorial discretion (PD). (Morales de Soto v. Lynch, 5/31/16)
CA7 Finds IJ and Government Complied with Statutory Requirements Relating to Petitioner’s Removal Proceedings
The court denied the petition for review, finding that the IJ and the government complied with the statutory responsibilities that imposed procedural requirements on the petitioner’s removal proceedings. (Aparicio-Brito v. Lynch 5/31/16)
BIA Reverses Denial of Continuance to Seek SIJS
Unpublished BIA decision reverses denial of continuance for respondent seeking Special Immigrant Juvenile status where there was no dispute that a dependency petition had been filed in the appropriate state court. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of K-N-M-T-, 5/31/16)
CA6 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Petitioner Whose Application Was “Strikingly Similar” to Several Others
The court upheld the IJ’s and BIA’s denials of petitioner’s asylum application, finding that the petitioner failed to adequately explain why his application was strikingly similar to several others, and failed to adequately corroborate his religious persecution claim. (Wang v. Lynch, 5/27/16)
BIA Says Circumstance-Specific Approach Should Be Used to Determine if Conviction Is for Crime of Domestic Violence
The BIA held that, in analyzing whether a conviction is for a crime of domestic violence under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i), the circumstance-specific approach should be applied to determine the domestic nature of the offense. Matter of Estrada, 26 I&N Dec. 749 (BIA 2016)