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
Supreme Court Reverses Ninth Circuit Asylum Decision, Gonzales v. Thomas
The Court remanded the Ninth Circuit’s decision holding that a family may constitute a social group for asylum purposes. The Court found that because the BIA did not express an opinion on the issue, the court should have applied “the ordinary remand rule.” (Gonzales v. Thomas, 4/17/06)
DHS OIG Assessment of ICE’s Detention and Removal of Illegal Aliens
This April 2006 report assesses DHS’ Immigration and Customs Enforcement program for detaining and removing illegal aliens apprehended in the U.S. and at ports of entry.
Asylum Officer Basic Training Credible Fear Lesson Plan
The Asylum Office released a revised Asylum Officer Basic Training Lesson Plan on credible fear determinations dated April 14, 2006.
CA1 Lacks Jurisdiction to Review Asylum One-Year Deadline
The court held that under the REAL ID Act, discretionary and factual determinations continue to fall outside its jurisdiction and that therefore, it lacked jurisdiction to review the determination that an asylum application was untimely. (Hayek v. Gonzales, 4/14/06)
CA2 Rejects Adverse Credibility in Chinese Asylum Case
The court held that the IJ mischaracterized Petitioner’s testimony, improperly discredited documents, failed to apply the proper test for corroboration, and improperly speculated about Petitioner’s ability to have more children. (Lin v. Gonzales, 4/12/06)
CA10 Holds Mandatory 30-Day BIA Appeal Deadline Not Jurisdictional
The court held that the BIA cannot review a late-filed appeal if a party objects. However, if the party fails to timely object to the late filing, the objection is forfeited and the BIA can hear the appeal. (Huerta v. Gonzales, 4/11/06)
CA9 Affirms Former INS Employee’s Conviction for Document Shredding (Updated 9/21/06)
The court affirmed the conviction of a former CSC employee who, along with other CSC employees, shredded an estimated 90,000 INS documents from January to April 2002 as part of an effort to reduce the filing backlog at the CSC. (United States v. Salazar, 4/10/06)
CA3 Affirms Removability Based on Terrorist Activity of Former INLA Member
The court concluded that the criminal bar to review did not apply and affirmed the BIA’s conclusions that Petitioner was removable for engaging in terrorist activity under INA §237(a)(4)(B) and was ineligible for asylum, withholding, and deferral of removal. (McAllister v. Gonzales, 4/10/06)
BIA Rules on Retroactivity of IIRIRA Unlawful Presence Ten-Year Bar
The BIA held that no period of an alien’s presence in the United States prior to 4/1/97 may be considered “unlawful presence” for purposes of determining whether the alien is inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. Section 1182(a)(9)(B)(i)(II). Matter of Raul-Rodarte, 23 I&N Dec. 902 (BIA 2006)
CBP Issues Fraud and Misrepresentation Threshold Guidance
CBP issued a memo to provide guidance to the field on what properly constitutes a sustainable charge of fraud or misrepresentation within the statute of 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the INA.
CA2 Finds Changed Conditions in Pakistani Christian Case
The court held that the BIA abused its discretion in refusing to reopen based on worsening country conditions and that an applicant may prevail on future persecution despite an adverse credibility determination as to past persecution. (Paul v. Gonzales, 4/6/06)
Michael Creppy to be Chief Administrative Hearing Officer
Chief Immigration Judge Michael Creppy will become Chief Administrative Hearing Officer at OCAHO on 4/24/06.
CA3 Rejects IJ’s Numerous Adverse Findings as Speculative in Asylum Claim from Cote d’Ivoire
The court held that substantial evidence did not support the IJ’s finding that the harm to Petitioner was not sufficiently severe to constitute persecution, and the IJ failed to apply the BIA’s three-part inquiry on corroboration. (Toure v. Gonzales, 4/5/06)
CA9 Requires Case-Specific Decision on Whether Sexual Abuse of a Minor AgFel Constitutes a Particularly Serious Crime
The court held that INA §242(a)(2)(B) did not preclude review of whether the BIA applied the proper legal standards in evaluating whether a crime was particularly serious so as to render Petitioner ineligible for withholding. (Afridi v. Gonzales, 4/4/06)
CA2 Vacates Conviction for Illegal Re-entry After Deportation
The court held that the IJ and BIA’s erroneous information on the availability of §212(c) was “a powerful deterrent from seeking judicial relief,” which deprived Petitioner of a realistic opportunity to obtain review. (U.S. v. Lopez, 4/4/06)
CA6 Finds IJ Violated Petitioner’s Due Process Rights by Relying on Hearsay Department of State Memoranda
The court found that the IJ’s reliance on two DOS memoranda to conclude that Petitioner’s documents were fraudulent violated Petitioner’s due process rights and vacated the IJ’s finding of a frivolous asylum claim. (Alexandrov v. Gonzales, 4/4/06)
CA8 Finds IJ Erred in Failing to Determine Whether Ethiopian Asylum-Seeker Suffered Past Persecution
CA8 noted that IJ’s denial of asylum was based solely on his holding that Petitioner did not have a subjectively genuine fear of future persecution, and that the IJ did not state specific cogent reasons for disbelieving Petitioner’s past persecution testimony. (Bushira v. Gonzales, 4/4/06)
DHS/ICE Proposes to Exempt Portions of New Records System from Privacy Act Provisions
In this proposed rulemaking, DHS/ICE proposes to exempt portions of a new system of records from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act because of criminal, civil and administrative enforcement requirements. (71 FR 16519, 4/3/06)
CA9 Upholds Aggravated Felony Finding; Remands on §209(c) Waiver
CA9 held an Oregon conviction for 3d degree rape constitutes an aggravated felony. The IJ erred by applying the heightened Matter of Jean standard to the §209(c)application without determining if the conviction was for a “violent or dangerous” crime. (Rives-Gomez v. Gonzales, 4/3/06)
Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in Cases Raising Issue of Whether Drug Possession is An Aggravated Felony
On 4/3/06, the Court granted cert in two cases - a civil immigration case and a criminal sentencing case - addressing whether a state felony possession conviction can constitute an aggravated felony under INA §101(a)(43)(B). (Lopez v. Gonzales; Toledo-Flores v. U.S.)
CA7 Holds BIA Did Not Abuse Its Discretion by Denying Motion to Reopen South African Asylum Case
CA7 upheld the BIA’s rulings that Petitioners failed to demonstrate due diligence in filing their motions to reopen and failed to show that conditions in South Africa had changed for persons of Indian ancestry between the time of the decision and the motion. (Patel v. Gonzales, 3/30/06)
CA8 Holds That Whether A Marriage Is Entered Into In “Good Faith” Is A Non-reviewable Discretionary Determination
CA8 concluded that because the IJ’s denial of a waiver of the joint petition requirement hinged on an adverse credibility determination, whether the marriage was entered in good faith was a discretionary determination under INA §216(c)(4) and not reviewable. (Suvorov v. Gonzales, 3/28/06)
CA5 Holds That A Timely Motion to Reopen Does Not Automatically Toll the Voluntary Departure Period (Updated 9/21/06)
The court held that the timely filing of a motion to reopen does not automatically toll the voluntary departure period. (Banda-Ortiz v. Gonzales, 3/28/06)
ICE Detention and Deportation Officer’s Field Manual
Following a FOIA request filed by AILA, ICE released a redacted version of the Detention and Deportation Officer’s Field Manual.
Section-by-Section Summary of the Chairman’s Mark, as Amended and Passed by the Judiciary Committee
AILA’s updated section-by-section summary of Chairman Specter’s Mark (the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006), as amended and passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee on 3/27/06.