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
Client Flyer: Common Terms Used in Removal Proceedings
AILA provides a flyer to help your clients understand common terms used in removal proceedings. The flyer is available as a generic PDF version and a Word version you can customize with your firm's information. The PDF is also available in Arabic, Chinese, French, and Spanish. Please share.
BIA Holds Objection to Defective NTA Is Forfeited If Not Raised by Respondent and Requires In Absentia Proceedings Where Proper Notice Was Provided
The BIA held that an objection to a defective NTA is forfeited if not timely raised by respondent, and that where a respondent fails to appear but received proper notice of the hearing, the IJ should proceed in absentia and not terminate. Matter of Lopez-Orellana, 29 I&N Dec. 533 (BIA 2026)
CA2 Holds That BIA Misread Petitioner’s Arguments in Finding He Failed to Act with Reasonable Due Diligence for Equitable Tolling
The court held that the BIA abused its discretion in denying the petitioner’s motion to reopen based on a change in law that arguably entitled him to relief from removal, finding that the BIA’s conclusion relied on a misreading of the petitioner’s arguments. (Ramsay v. Bondi, 3/27/26)
DHS Notice Extends Finding of Mass Influx of Aliens
DHS notice stating that DHS Secretary Kristi Noem is further extending the “Finding of Mass Influx of Aliens” first issued 1/23/25. This extension, dated 1/12/26, will expire in 180 days. (91 FR 14703, 3/26/26)
AILA Congressional Briefing on 3/26: Administration Policies Weaken Asylum System and Immigration Courts
On 3/26, AILA briefed Congress on three policy briefs from the A Better Way on Immigration series focusing on the Administration’s policy changes made over the past year to pursue its mass deportation campaign, weaken the asylum system, and make the immigration courts less efficient and independent.
BIA Finds That IJs Must Identify Evidence Rebutting Presumption of Reliability of Form I-213 in Alienage Determination
The BIA held that where an IJ finds that a Form I-213 is unreliable and insufficient to establish alienage, the IJ must point to specific evidence in the record sufficient to rebut the presumption of reliability. Matter of Mercado-Martinez, 29 I&N Dec. 529 (BIA 2026)
CA8 Holds That Unadmitted Noncitizens Present in the United States Are “Seeking Admission” and Subject to Mandatory Detention
The court reversed the grant of habeas relief to the Mexican petitioner, holding that an unadmitted noncitizen present in the United States is “seeking admission” and subject to mandatory detention under INA §235(b)(2)(A). (Avila v. Bondi, et al., 3/25/26)
CA4 Holds That Virginia 12-Month Maximum Sentence Qualifies as “One Year or Longer” for CIMT Removability
The court denied the petitions for review, holding that a Virginia Class 1 misdemeanor punishable by up to 12 months qualifies as a crime for which a sentence of one year or longer may be imposed under INA §237(a)(2)(A)(i). (Perdomo Ulloa v. Bondi, 3/25/26)
CA5 Upholds Denial of CAT Deferral as to Salvadoran Petitioner Based on Lack of Specific Intent and Speculative Torture Risk
The court held that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s denial of CAT deferral to petitioner, concluding that El Salvador’s harsh prison conditions were not specifically intended to inflict torture and that the risk of future torture was speculative. (Fuentes-Pineda v. Bondi, 3/24/26)
CA9 Holds It Lacks Jurisdiction over Petition Challenging Only Denial of CAT Relief
The court dismissed the petition for review of the IJ’s order affirming a negative reasonable fear determination, holding that it lacks jurisdiction to hear a petition that challenges only the denial of relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). (Navarrete v. Bondi, 3/23/26)
EOIR Issues Policy Memorandum (PM) 26-03 on Judicial Conduct and Professionalism
EOIR Director Daren Margolin issued policy memorandum (PM) 26-03 to clarify EOIR’s process for addressing complaints of judicial misconduct by its adjudicators. The PM supersedes prior guidance on the judicial complaint process, last updated in November 2023.
BIA Holds That IJ Clearly Erred in Credibility Determination and Pattern or Practice Finding Regarding Anglophones in Cameroon
The BIA held that the IJ clearly erred in finding the respondent credible and that the IJ’s conclusory statement that there was a pattern or practice of persecution against Anglophones in Cameroon was not supported by record evidence. Matter of E–N–N–, 29 I&N Dec. 586 (BIA 2026)
Featured Issue: Ensuring Legal Representation for People Facing Removal
Despite the critical role legal representation plays in ensuring fairness in removal proceedings, the law still does not guarantee the government will pay for counsel if the person is unable to afford one. AILA provides resources on ensuring legal representation for people facing removal.
Policy Brief: America Needs Independent, Fair, and Efficient Immigration Courts
The Administration has implemented many changes to the immigration court system that undermines its ability to deliver fair outcomes consistent with the law. This brief explores these changes and provides recommendations to Congress to make the courts fairer, faster, and restore the public’s trust.
AILA Sends Letter to Leader Thune, Leader Schumer, Speaker Johnson, and Leader Jeffries on Funding for ICE and CBP
AILA President Jeff Joseph and Executive Director Ben Johnson sent a letter to Leader Thune, Leader Schumer, Speaker Johnson, and Leader Jeffries to block funding to ICE and CBP until meaningful reforms are enacted to hold these agencies accountable and restore safety to American communities.
CA1 Finds No Colorable Legal or Constitutional Error in BIA’s Denial of Sua Sponte Reopening
The court denied the consolidated petitions for review, holding that the Bosniak petitioners failed to raise any colorable legal or constitutional claims challenging the BIA’s denial of sua sponte reopening. (Hodzic v. Bondi, et al., 3/19/26)
BIA Denies Motion to Reopen for SIJ-Based Adjustment of Status Due to Four-Year Delay in Visa Availability
The BIA held that no ineffective assistance claim lies where person retained was not an attorney and did not hold himself out as one, and that minor respondents’ SIJ-based adjustment eligibility was speculative due to visa unavailability. Matter of Z–R–C–N–, et al., 29 I&N Dec. 523 (BIA 2026)
BIA Vacates Grant of Cancellation Where Economic and Educational Hardships to Respondent’s Children Were Not Exceptional and Extremely Unusual
The BIA held that respondent had not shown that the economic, educational, and emotional hardships his 26– and 24-year-old children might experience if he was removed to Mexico would constitute exceptional and extremely unusual hardship. Matter of Arevalo-Vargas, 29 I&N Dec. 519 (BIA 2026)
EOIR Issues Policy Memo on Deadline for Appealing an Immigration Judge Decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals
EOIR Director Daren Margolin issued Policy Memorandum (PM) 26-02 to clarify that the appeal deadline for all immigration court decisions to the BIA is 30 days as a result of the Amica Ctr. for Immig. Rts. v. EOIR lawsuit. The memo also states ACIS should also reflect the current 30-day deadline.
BIA Finds Respondent’s Intent to Seek Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver Did Not Warrant Continued Administrative Closure
Where the respondent’s removal proceedings had been administratively closed for over 13 years, the BIA held that continued administrative closure was not warranted based on her intention to apply for a provisional unlawful presence waiver. Matter of Medina Madrid, 29 I&N Dec. 514 (BIA 2026)
The Advocates for Human Rights File Lawsuit to Protect Public Access to Immigration Court Hearings
The Advocates for Human Rights filed a lawsuit against DOJ and EOIR in the DC District Court to challenge DOJ's increasing restrictions in public access to hearings at the Fort Snelling Immigration Court in Minnesota. (The Advocates for Human Rights v. Bondi et al., 3/12/26)
CA2 Remands Where BIA Failed to Make But-For Eligibility Determination Before Applying Material Support Bar
The court held that the BIA must determine whether a petitioner would be eligible for asylum or withholding of removal but for the material support bar, because USCIS will not consider a waiver application absent such a determination. (Sufiyan v. Bondi, 3/12/26)
CA8 Holds That Substantial Evidence Is the Standard of Review for Exceptional and Extremely Unusual Hardship Determinations
The court held that hardship determinations under the exceptional and extremely unusual hardship standard are reviewed for substantial evidence, and denied the petition for review as to the Mexican petitioner seeking cancellation of removal. (Alonso-Juarez v. Bondi, 3/12/26)
BIA Holds That IJ Errs in Terminating Proceedings Without Taking Pleadings Where Respondents Appear but DHS Does Not
The BIA held that where the respondents appear at an initial master calendar hearing, but DHS does not, the IJ errs in terminating proceedings without taking the respondents’ pleadings to the Notices to Appear (NTAs). Matter of Arana Castillo, et al., 29 I&N Dec. 593 (BIA 2026)
Policy Brief: Americans Want Safe Communities, Not a Dangerous and Costly Deportation Agenda
The Administration's focus on pursuing its immigration enforcement agenda has endangered American communities while recklessly spending taxpayer funds. This policy brief questions this agenda and provides commonsense strategies to improve immigration enforcement and public safety.