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 Finds “Criminal Deportees” to Haiti Not a Particular Social Group
The court held that the BIA properly denied CAT protection because Petitioner did not demonstrate the specific intent element for torture and joined other circuits in finding that criminal deportees are not a social group. (Toussaint v. Atty. Gen. of U.S., 7/26/06)
CA9 Finds Family Unity Is “Admitted in Any Status” for Cancellation Purposes
The court examined the plain meaning and legislative history of INA §240A, along with precedent, and concluded that acceptance into the Family Unity Program constituted “admitted in any status” for cancellation of removal purposes. (Garcia-Quintero v. Gonzales, 7/24/06)
CA11 BIA Erred in Denying Motion to Reopen Colombian Asylum Case
The court found that the evidence in the motion to reopen was unavailable at the time of Petitioner's previous hearing and called into question the credibility of a witness who was material to the IJ’s assessment of her claim. (Verano-Velasco v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 7/24/06)
Objection Letter to New BIA Extension Policy by CLINIC, AILF, CAIR, and NIP
Effective August 14, 2006, the BIA is reducing the time period granted for a briefing extension from 21 to 15 days for detained persons with cases before the BIA. CLINIC, AILF, the CAIR Coalition, and the National Immigration Project submitted a letter objecting to this new policy.
CA8 Holds IJ Erred in Reopening Proceedings and Terminating Asylum
CA8 held that the IJ abused her discretion in reopening proceedings without explaining whether the documents in support of the motion were material and previously unavailable, and erred in terminating asylum based on documents that did not prove fraud. (Hailemichael v. Gonzales, 7/21/06)
CA8 Holds Expedited Removal Proceedings Not Retroactive
The court held that the application of expedited removal procedures under INA §238(b) to Petitioner was not impermissibly retroactive. Petitioner’s failure to respond to the government’s NOI precluded court review of his due process claim. (Gonzalez v. Chertoff, 7/20/06)
CA2 Asks BIA to Clarify Standards for Economic Persecution
The court remanded for the BIA to clarify the standard it applied in determining that Petitioner’s treatment did not constitute economic persecution. (Mirzoyan v. Gonzales, 7/20/06)
CA3 Finds Refugee Who Adjusts to LPR Status Is Subject to Removal
The court concluded that the INA allows for a person who entered the country as a refugee and later adjusted his status to LPR to be placed in removal proceedings even though his refugee status was never terminated. (Romanishyn v. Atty. Gen. of U.S., 7/20/06)
AILA Backgrounder on Due Process, Civil Liberties, and Security
This updated AILA Backgrounder discusses the importance of upholding due process and civil liberties while enhancing our national security.
AILA Position Paper on Civil Liberties Restoration Act
Many new policies since 9/11 have not enhanced our security and have eroded our civil liberties. AILA strongly supports the Civil Liberties Restoration Act, which seeks to roll back the most egregious post-9/11 policies and strike a balance between security needs and liberty interests.
CA2 Overturns Adverse Credibility Finding in Forced Sterilization Case
The court held that the IJ’s finding that Petitioner failed to testify about his wife’s sterilization at his first asylum hearing did not support the IJ’s adverse credibility determination. (Kim v. Gonzales, 7/19/06)
CRS Issues Report Comparing Enforcement Provisions in H.R. 4437 and S.2611
Congressional Research Service report comparing enforcement provisions in H.R. 4437, S. 2611 and current law.
CA3 Finds Gay Argentine Suffered Past Persecution by Police
The court found that the treatment Petitioner suffered at the hands of the police, which occurred at least 20 times over several years, was persecution, even though he did not suffer severe injuries nor was he ever detained more than 12 hours. (Maldonado v. Atty. Gen. of U.S., 7/18/06)
CA3 Discusses “Particularly Serious Crime” Bar to Withholding of Removal
The court held that an offense must be an aggravated felony in order to be classified as a particularly serious crime and that the IJ erred in failing to consider only the loss attached to the fraud count for which Petitioner was convicted. (Alaka v. Att’y Gen. of the U.S., 7/18/06)
CA9 Remands Motion to Reopen for BIA Abuse of Discretion
The court held that the BIA’s failure to identify and evaluate the factors favorable to Petitioner’s motion to reopen, which presented new evidence of hardship for cancellation of removal, was an abuse of discretion. (Franco-Rosendo v. Gonzales, 07/18/06)
CA2 Finds Record Shows Worsening Conditions in Belarus
The court held that the IJ and BIA erred in overlooking evidence that conditions in Belarus deteriorated between 1996 and 2000 and remanded the withholding claim. (Serafimovich v. Ashcroft, 7/17/06)
CA6 Invalidates Conviction For Failure to Prove Vacatur Solely for Immigration Purposes (Updated 11/14/06)
The court remanded the case to the BIA to vacate Petitioner’s order of removal, holding that the government had not met its burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that Petitioner’s conviction remained valid for immigration purposes. (Pickering v. Gonzales, 10/4/06)
CA7 Refuses to Apply Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine to Person in Custody
The court denied the government’s motion to dismiss under the fugitive disentitlement doctrine because Petitioner had surrendered to immigration authorities and remained in DHS custody. (Gutierrez-Almazan, 7/17/06)
BIA to Follow Revised Practice Regarding First Briefing Extensions
BIA notice advising on revised general practice regarding briefing deadlines for cases before the Board where the individual is detained, reducing the amount of time granted for first briefing extensions in detainee cases and the number of extension requests allowed. (71 FR 40151, 7/14/06)
ICE Memo on Confiscation and Return of Original Documents
This July 14, 2006 memorandum from John P. Torres, Acting Director of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Office of Detention and Removal Operations, outlines the procedures for confiscation and return of original documents for persons in removal proceedings.
USCIS Letter on Running of INA § 212(a)(9)(B) Inadmissibility Period
A 1/26/09 letter from Lynden Melmed, USCIS Chief Counsel and a 7/14/06 letter from Robert Divine, USCIS Chief Counsel, confirm when the INA §212(a)(9)(B) inadmissibility period begins to run, and how the period is affected by parole or lawful admission under INA §212(d)(3).
CA2 Finds No Jurisdiction to Review Denial of §212(i) Waiver
The court held that for purposes of a waiver under INA §212(i), a finding of a lack of extreme hardship is a discretionary determination, which is barred from judicial review under INA §242(a)(2)(B)(i). (Zhang v. Gonzales, 7/12/06)
BIA Affirms Asylum for Former Child Soldier
In an unpublished decision, the BIA affirmed the IJ’s decision to grant asylum, noting the respondent established a well-founded fear of persecution based on his Acholi tribal membership, as well as the possibility he could be identified as a former child soldier.
CA2 Remands for BIA to Develop Standards on “Frivolousness”
The court found that substantial evidence supported the negative credibility finding but remanded the IJ’s finding of frivolousness and asked the BIA to formulate standards for deciding when an asylum seeker’s application is frivolous. (Liu v. DOJ, 7/11/06)
USCIS Memo on Issuance of NTAs
A 7/11/06 memo from Michael Aytes, USCIS Associate Director, Domestic Operations, advising of an agreement with ICE regarding issuing an NTA and handling cases in which the beneficiary or applicant appears to be removable, including where benefit applications have been denied.