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
The Morton Memo: Supplemental Guidance for ICE Agents
There is a joke developing out here in the field: How many ICE agents does it take to apply the June 17, 2011, Morton Memo? Answer: Two—one to read it and another to ignore it. That's how I felt last week when the ICE Detroit Field Office issued a terse denial to a well documented application [̷
BIA on 5-Year Statute of Limitations for Rescission of LPR Status
The BIA held that the five-year statute of limitations in §246(a) does not bar removal of an alien admitted on an immigrant visa because that section relates only to rescission of LPR status acquired through adjustment. Matter of Cruz de Ortiz, 25 I&N Dec. 601 (BIA 2011)
CRCL Releases First and Second Quarterly Reports for FY2011
DHS Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) combined quarterly report to Congress, dated 9/20/11, providing data and analysis regarding the office’s activities during the first and second quarters of FY2011 and a flow chart of the CRCL process.
CA9 Rejects Challenge to §212(c) Special Motion to Reopen Deadline
The court held that the April 26, 2005 deadline to file motions to reopen for §212(c) relief is a constitutionally sound procedural rule and that absent exceptional circumstances, petitioners that miss the deadline are not entitled to relief. (Luna v. Holder, 9/19/11)
CA2 Says Firm Resettlement Inquiry Is Not Limited to Post-Persecution Ties
The court held that the firm resettlement inquiry requires consideration of all ties established by an alien in a third country before entering the U.S., including ties formed prior to the persecution giving rise to the asylum claim. (Tchitchui v. Holder, 9/19/11)
DHS HSAC Secure Communities Task Force Report
DHS Homeland Security Advisory Council’s Task Force on Secure Communities report recommending ways ICE may improve the Secure Communities program.
BIA Says IJ Scope of TPS Review Is Not Limited to Evidence Submitted to USCIS
The BIA held that the IJ may consider any material and relevant evidence in support of a TPS application that is renewed in removal proceedings, regardless of whether the evidence was previously considered by USCIS. Matter of Figueroa, 25 I&N Dec. 596 (BIA 2011)
CA9 Rejects Leap Year Argument in Defining “One Year” Term of Imprisonment
The court held that for purposes of INA §101(a)(43)(F), a sentence of 365 days qualifies as a “term of imprisonment [of] at least one year,” even when the sentence was served in whole or in part during a leap year. (Habibi v. Holder, 9/14/11; amended 12/8/11).
BIA Says IJ Scope of I-751 Review Is Not Limited to Evidence Submitted to DHS
The BIA held that the IJ should consider new evidence submitted in support of a renewed I-751 with a waiver of the joint filing requirement regardless of whether the evidence was previously considered by DHS. Matter of Herrera Del Orden, 25 I&N Dec. 589 (BIA 2011)
TRAC Report on Removal Proceedings in the Decade since 9/11
A Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) report, dated 9/9/11, providing an overview of removal proceedings initiated in the Immigration Courts, and comparing data on removal proceedings from the decades before and after 9/11/01.
CA9 Says BIA Erred in Refusing to Permit Withdrawal of Prior Attorney’s Admissions
The court held that the attorney’s admission of the NTA’s allegation that Petitioner smuggled his brother was the result of ineffective assistance. The BIA erred in not permitting Petitioner to withdraw the admission. (Santiago-Rodriguez v. Holder, 9/9/11)
BIA Refuses to Apply Frivolous Asylum Bar to Derivative Child
In an unpublished decision, the BIA held that as the minor derivative of her mother's application, the respondent did not receive the necessary advisals, and held that the frivolousness finding applicable to her mother should not be applicable to her. Courtesy of Alan Lee.
CA9 Says Incorrect Standards Were Applied in Refusing to Excuse Late Asylum Application
The IJ applied incorrect legal standards when finding Petitioner had not shown changed or extraordinary circumstances to excuse his late application and the IJ erred in finding that the application was not filed in a reasonable time period. (Singh v. Holder, 9/8/11)
CA3 Sets Standard for Determining Whether LPR Is an Applicant for Admission
The court held that the standard for determining whether an LPR should be treated as an applicant for admission, and thus paroled for prosecution, is probable cause to believe he has committed a crime under INA §212(a)(2). (Doe v. Att’y Gen. of the U.S., 9/8/11)
CA6 Joins Sister Circuits in Upholding Matter of Acosta Hidalgo
The court upheld Acosta Hidalgo’s interpretation of 8 CFR §1239.2(f), that removal proceedings may only be terminated under that provision where DHS affirmatively attests to the alien’s prima facie eligibility for naturalization. (Shewchun v. Holder, 9/8/11)
CA5 Rejects BIA’s Interpretation of CSPA in Matter of Wang
The court held that the automatic conversion and priority date retention provisions of INA §203(h)(3) unambiguously apply to the entire universe of petitions described in INA §203(h)(2), including fourth preference petitions. (Khalid v. Holder, 9/8/11)
CA7 Remands Colombian/FARC Asylum Claims for Further Proceedings
The court found that the BIA inexplicably focused only on the FARC’s burning of Petitioner’s trucks in concluding he was not persecuted and rejected the Board’s finding that even if he was persecuted, it was not due to a protected ground. (Escobar v. Holder, 9/7/11)
CA10 Rejects Political Opinion and Social Group Claim in MS-13 Case
The court found that Salvadoran women aged 12 to 25 who have resisted gang recruitment is sufficiently particular for purposes of a social group claim, but found that the proposed group failed the social visibility test. (Rivera-Barrientos v. Holder, 9/7/11)
Audio: AILA Issues a Spanish Language PSA
In response to the White House announcement on 8/18/11, and in conjunction with a written Consumer Advisory, AILA issued a Spanish language audio PSA that was distributed nationally to Hispanic radio outlets and also online media. This is the audio recording.
CA9 Limits CSPA Auto-Conversion and Priority Date Retention to F-2A Petitions
The court found reasonable the BIA’s decision in Matter of Wang that the CSPA under INA §203(h)(3) does not permit automatic conversion and/or priority date retention for derivative beneficiaries of F-3 and F-4 petitions. (De Osorio v. Mayorkas, 9/2/11)
CA7 Recognizes Threat of “Honor Killing” as Basis for Social Group Claim
The court found that Petitioner is a member of the particular social group of women in Jordan who have flouted repressive moral norms and face a high risk of honor killing. (Sarhan v. Holder, 9/2/11)
CA8 Says Evidence of Alienage was Lawfully Obtained
The court found no need for an evidentiary hearing where the record did not support Petitioner’s belief that his arrest was racially motivated, and found no evidence that Petitioner’s statements regarding alienage were involuntary. (Lopez-Gabriel v. Holder, 9/2/11)
CA6 Finds No Jurisdiction to Review Decision to Enforce Removal Order
The court rejected Petitioner’s argument that the government’s act of enforcing a 1996 deportation order in 2009 amounted to a de facto final order of removal and dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction. (Casillas v. Holder, 9/2/11)
Owner of an Iowa Roofing Company Pleads Guilty to Harboring Undocumented Individuals
ICE press release announcing that Samira Zuniga, the owner Xtreme Construction, pleaded guilty in federal court to harboring and conspiring to harbor undocumented individuals who were arrested while working on a residential roofing job in April of 2011.
Deportation Without Due Process
NILC and partners provide a report that synthesizes information obtained via FOIA about “stipulated removal”, which allowed immigration officials to deport over 160,000 non-U.S. citizens without ever giving them their day in court.