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
CA9 Applies Categorical Approach and Holds Indecent Exposure Not a Crime of Moral Turpitude
CA9 applied the categorical approach and held that indecent exposure under California law is not categorically a crime of moral turpitude. (Nunez v. Holder, 2/10/10)
Parlak and the Persecutor Bar
AILA Amicus Committee alert on Parlak v. Holder.
Third Circuit – Social Group Analysis
AILA Amicus Committee alert on Valdaviezo-Galdamez v. Holder.
Kawashima III
AILA Amicus Committee alert on Kawashima III, where the Court applied a circumstance-specific approach without remanding it to the Board for consideration.
CA9 Finds Failure to Consider Country Conditions Constitutes Reversible Error in CAT Case
CA9 granted petition as to CAT relief application and remanded finding failure to consider evidence of country conditions constitutes reversible error and IJ and BIA erred by construing “government acquiescence” too narrowly. (Aguilar-Ramos v. Holder, 2/4/10)
Tenth Circuit Holds K-2 Visa Holders Do Not “Age-Out” for Purposes of Adjustment of Status.
AILA Amicus Committee alert on Colmenares Carpio v. Holder, in which the tenth circuit court held that K-2 visa holders do not “age-out” for purposes of adjusting.
Bayo: A Constitutional Victory
AILA Amicus Committee alert on Bayo v. Napolitano, where the Court found that there must be some process to assure that Visa Waiver Program waivers are knowing and voluntary, although it speculated that the newly implemented waiver process may resolve the issue.
Immigration Law Advisor, January 2010 (Vol. 4, No. 1)
Immigration Law Advisor, a legal publication from EOIR, with an article on waiver relief for refugees who engaged in criminal activity, federal court activity for December 2009, an article on the motions to reopen and IIRIRA, recent BIA precedent decisions, and a regulatory update.
BIA on “Changed Circumstances” Related to Asylum Application Filing Delays
The BIA held that the particular circumstances related to delays in filing an asylum application must be evaluated to determine whether the application was filed “within a reasonable period given those ‘changed circumstances.’” Matter of T-M-H- & S-W-C-, 25 I&N Dec. 193 (BIA 2010)
BIA on Family Violence Battery Conviction
In an unpublished decision, the BIA remanded, finding respondent's family violence battery conviction is not aggravated felony crime of violence because term of imprisonment of at least one year was not imposed. Courtesy of Mark Newman.
CA8 Finds Unlawful Use of SSN Constitutes Crime Involving Moral Turpitude
CA8 denied petition, finding that conviction for unlawfully using social security number under 42 U.S.C. § 408(a)(7)(A) constituted crime involving moral turpitude.(Lateef v. Dep’t of Homeland Security, 1/29/10)
USCIS Fraud Referral Sheet
USCIS Fraud Referral Sheet which was submitted into evidence by ICE during removal proceedings.
CA7 Finds Repeal of INA §212(c) Not Impermissibly Retroactive
CA7 denied petition, finding petitioner deportable due to his conviction of counterfeiting over two decades ago and holding that repeal of INA § 212(c) is not impermissibly retroactive. (Canto v. Holder, 1/28/10)
CA9 on Burden to Show Conviction of a Disqualifying Controlled Substance Offense
CA9 granted in part and remanded for further proceedings consistent with Sandoval-Lua to permit government to put forth reliable evidence to show petitioner was convicted of disqualifying controlled substance offense. (Esquivel-Garcia v. Holder, 1/28/10)
Sign-On Letter Urging ICE to Take Immediate Steps in Response to Detainee Deaths
AILA and AIC joined other organizations in a letter to ICE Assistant Secretary Mr. John Morton on ICE’s response to detainee deaths that urges and provides short-term recommendations for immediate concrete steps to bring greater accountability.
BIA Reaffirms Matter of Briones on Ineligibility for §245(i) Adjustment of Status
The BIA held that an alien who is inadmissible under INA §212(a)(9)(C)(i), is ineligible for adjustment of status under INA §245(i). Matter of Briones, 24 I&N Dec. 355 (BIA 2007) reaffirmed. Matter Diaz and Lopez, 25 I&N Dec. 188 (BIA 2010)
BIA on Stepparent Qualification as “Parent” to Establish Hardship under INA §240A(b)(1)(D)
The BIA held that a stepparent who qualifies as a “parent” under INA §101(b)(2), at time of proceedings is a qualifying relative for purposes of establishing exceptional and extremely unusual hardship for cancellation of removal under INA. Matter of Morales, 25 I&N Dec. 186 (BIA 2010)
CA9 Finds Material Witnesses for Government Do Not Constitute Protected Social Group
The court denied application for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under CAT, finding that material witnesses for the government do not constitute a protected social group (Velasco-Cervantes v. Holder, 1/27/10)
ORR State Letter on "Cuban and Haitian Entrants" Eligibility for ORR-Funded Benefits and Services
ORR issued a state letter that reviews the definition of "Cuban and Haitian entrant" as it applies to Haitian nationals and clarifies the acceptable documentation these individuals may present when they apply for ORR-funded benefits and services.
Fact Sheet on EOIR’s Legal Orientation and Pro Bono Program
On 1/27/10, EOIR issued a fact sheet on its Legal Orientation and Pro Bono Program, which includes four initiatives: the Legal Orientation Program (LOP), the BIA Pro Bono Project, the Unaccompanied Alien Children Initiative and the Model Hearing Program.
Matter of Neto
AILA Amicus Committee alert on Matter of Neto, where the Board held that Immigration Judges and the Board have jurisdiction to determine whether a job is “portable” under INA 204(j).
Matter of T-, Oral Argument at BIA
AILA Amicus Committee alert on oral arguments in Matter of T-, a case in which AILA appeared as amicus along with the American Immigration Council and the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project.
BIA Finds Death of Petitioning Spouse in Conditional Period Excuses I-751 Joint Filing Requirement
The BIA held that a conditional permanent resident seeking to remove conditional basis of status, who timely filed and appeared for interview, doesn’t need separate hardship waiver if petitioning spouse died in the two-year conditional period. Matter of Rose, 25 I&N Dec. 181 (BIA 2010)
CA4 Finds IJ Committed Substantial Legal Error in Rejecting Certain Corroborating Evidence of Asylum Applicant
CA4 granted petition for review, vacated BIA decision, and remanded asylum case, finding that IJ committed substantial legal error in rejecting certain of petitioner’s corroborating evidence (Marynenka v. Holder, 1/25/10).
CA4 Finds District Court Lacks Jurisdiction to Consider Denial of Adjustment of Status
CA4 held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to entertain petitioner’s challenge to USCIS District Director’s eligibility determination and denial of adjustment of status. (Lee v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, 1/25/10).