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
CA1 Upholds Denial of Asylum for Chinese Catholic
The court found no evidence that Petitioner suffered mistreatment in China because of her Catholic faith and that the climate in China was generally not oppressive for Catholics. (Zheng v. Gonzales, 8/4/05)
CA7 Finds Two Verbal Threats by FARC Did Not Amount to Persecution
The Court found that verbal threats for refusal to sell military supplies to FARC were not sufficiently immediate or menacing to be persecution, nor were the threats held to be on account of a protected ground.(Hernandez-Baena v. Gonzales, 8/4/05)
CA9 Rules Against Family Firmly Resettled in Canada in Effort to Discourage Forum Shopping
The Court held that a family who abandoned its refugee application in Canada after residing there for 4 years, was presumed to be firmly resettled. The Court found that forum shopping undermined the integrity of the international asylum regime. (Maharaj v. Gonales, 8/4/05)
CA9 Finds Russian Jew’s Cumulative Harm Amounted to Persecution
The Court found that the sustained economic pressure faced by Petitioner, the nature and extent of the physical violence she experienced, and the restrictions on her ability to practice her religion cumulatively amounted to persecution. (Krovota v. Gonzales, 8/4/05)
CA9 Finds that Asylum Hearing of Russian Pentecostal Did Not Comport with Due Process
The Court found that the IJ’s conduct was prejudicial, having excluded the testimony of several key witnesses, including Petitioner’s grandmother and an expert who could have affected the outcome of the proceedings. (Zolotukhin v. Gonzales, 8/3/05)
CA7 Addresses Scope of Review of CAT Claims By Criminal Aliens
The court held that review of CAT claims by persons subject to INA §242(a)(2)(C) is limited to legal and constitutional claims, and not factual conclusions. (Hamid v. Gonzales, 8/2/05)
CA1 Finds Short Detentions Do Not Amount to Persecution
In an Albanian asylum claim, the court held that because Petitioner’s detentions lasted only 24 hours and he never needed medical attention as a result of the beatings he received, the harm did not amount to persecution. (Topalli v. Gonzales, 8/2/05)
CA2 Says BIA Erred in Failing to Consider China Country Report
The court found significant error in the BIA’s failure to consider the country report submitted by a Chinese asylum applicant where the report corroborated his fear of persecution based on his Christian religion. (Chen v. Gonzales, 8/2/05)
Chicago-Based Groups Release Report on Videoconferencing
Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice and the Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago released a study entitled, “Videoconferencing in Removal Proceedings: A Case Study of the Chicago Immigration Court,” calling for a moratorium on the use of videoconferencing until improvements are made.
CA8 Upholds IJ’s Adverse Credibility Determination for Kenyan Asylum Applicant
CA8 found that the IJ gave specific, cogent reasons for disbelieving Petitioner, including the lack of detail in his story, his implausible explanations for his bigamy and lack of contact with his family, and the lack of corroborating evidence for his allegations.(Ombongi v. Gonzales, 8/1/05)
CA7 Finds that Cohabitation with Boyfriend Is Not an Expression of Political Opinion
The Court found that a Chinese asylum applicant’s alleged expression of political opinion via cohabitation with a man outside marriage did not constitute a political opinion. (Li v. Gonzales, 8/1/05)
AILA/TSC Liaison Minutes (8/1/05)
Minutes from the 8/1/05 liaison meeting, cleared by TSC, include such topics as K-1 eligibility for EAD after marriage, cross-chargeability, recapture of earlier priority date, timing of mail pick-up, correct card push email address, I-485 approval notices, biometrics notices and more.
CA8 Upholds Regulation Barring Arriving Aliens from Adjusting Status While in Removal Proceedings
Reasoning that the ability limit eligibility for adjustment of status falls within the Attorney General’s discretionary authority in INA § 245(a) and INA §245(i)(2), the court upheld the regulation barring arriving aliens from adjusting in proceedings. (Mouelle et al. v. Gonzales, 7/29/05)
CA8 Rejects Claim that Salvadoran Government Unable or Unwilling to Protect Against Gang Members
CA8 rejected claims of Salvadoran asylum applicant, holding that Petitioner failed to show that Salvadoran police were unable or unwilling to protect her from a gang member. The Court discounted news articles about gang activity in El Salvador as too general. (Menjivar v. Gonzales, 7/29/05)
CA2 on Chevron Deference in the Context of BIA Summary Affirmance
The court held that an IJ's ruling on an issue of law that has been summarily affirmed by the BIA is not entitled to Chevron deference. (Shi Liang Lin v. Gonzales, 7/29/05)
CA3 Says Pennsylvania Simple Assault Is Not a Crime of Violence
The court ruled that a conviction in Pennsylvania for simple assault is not a crime of violence and is therefore, not an aggravated felony. (Popal v. Gonzales, 7/29/05)
CA3 Holds Honduran Street Children Are Not a Cognizable Social Group
The court found that the three main elements of Petitioner’s social group—poverty, homelessness and youth—were too vague and broad to be characteristics of a protected social group for asylum purposes. (Escobar v. Gonzales, (7/29/05)
CA6 Says BIA Credibility Determination Was Not Based on Substantial Evidence
The Court found that the inconsistencies cited by the Board either did not go to the heart of Petitioner’s claim, were corrected at the start of the hearing, or were non-existent. (Pergega v. Gonzales, 7/28/05)
CA8 Says BIA Erred in Not Considering Significant Evidence Regarding Objective Fear of Persecution
The Court held that the BIA erred in rejecting testimony of asylum applicant’s sister in finding that the applicant lacked an objective fear of persecution based on China’s One-Child Policy. (Zheng v. Gonzales, 7/28/05)
CA1 Upholds IJ’s Adverse Credibility Finding in Albanian Asylum Case
The court found that IJ correctly identified inconsistencies in Petitioner’s testimony and application, offered specific reasons for the adverse credibility finding, and properly relied on the 2001 DOS country report for Albania. (Dhima v. Gonzales, 7/28/05)
CA1 Finds No Objectively Reasonable Fear for Eritrean from Ethiopia
The court held that substantial evidence supported the IJ’s finding that country conditions had changed such that the ethnic Eritrean petitioner would not be denied employment or deported to Eritrea if she returned to Ethiopia. (Negeya v. Gonzales, 7/27/05)
CA2 Finds IJ/BIA Failed to Address Nationality in Tibetan Asylum Claim
The court held that both the IJ and BIA erred in failing to address the threshold question of Petitioner’s nationality, where Petitioner was born and raised in refugee camp in India to Tibetan parents. (Dhoumo v. BIA, 7/27/05)
ICE Liaison Minutes (7/27/05)
The liaison minutes record the discussions with ICE regarding such topics as return of documents in removal proceedings, access to counsel, "cap gap" enforcement, departure bonds, database jurisdiction, and vigilante groups, among other issues. These minutes have been approved by the agency.
CA2 Says Parents and In-Laws Do Not Qualify for Family Planning-Based Asylum
The court denied asylum to Chinese nationals whose daughters-in-law were subjected to coercive population control methods, finding that an individual’s right to procreate does not extend to their parents and in-laws. (Feng Yuan v. Gonzales, 7/26/05)
CA5 Reverses Fraud Aggravated Felony Finding
The court held that Petitioner’s conviction for conspiracy to commit interstate transportation of stolen property was neither a fraud offense with loss of more than $10,000 to the victim, nor a conspiracy offense, and thus it was not an aggravated felony. (Omari v. Gonzales, 7/25/05)