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
CA7 Finds the Numerical Limitation on Motions to Reopen Is Not Jurisdictional
The court reasoned that successive motions to reopen “do not postpone the taking of an appeal to the court of appeals from the order of removal.” Thus, the court concluded that it could review the merits of the BIA’s denial of the petitioner’s fourth motion to reopen. (Joshi v. Ashcroft, 11/19/04)
CA9 Strikes Down Reinstatement Regulation
The court invalidated the regulation permitting DHS officers to unilaterally reinstate a prior order without a hearing. The court held that the regulation was ultra vires to INA § 240, which requires an immigration judge to determine removabililty. (Morales-Izquierdo v. Ashcroft, 11/18/04)
ICE Memorandum on Orders of Supervision
A 11/12/2004 memorandum from Victor X. Cerda, Acting Director, ICE Detention and Removal Operations, standardizes the reporting requirements for individuals released under an order of supervision or released on recognizance.
Analysis of Supreme Court Decision Holding DUI Not a Crime of Violence
Analysis of Supreme Court ruling that state driving under the influence (DUI) offenses with a mens rea of negligence or less are not crimes of violence, as defined under 18 U.S.C. §16, and therefore are not aggravated felonies under INA §101(a)(43)(F). (Leocal v. Ashcroft, 11/9/04)
Unanimous Supreme Court Rules DUI Is Not "Crime of Violence"
The Supreme Court held that state DUI statutes that do not have a mens rea component or require only a showing of negligence in the operation of a vehicle are not "crimes of violence" under 18 USC §16, which would have made the offense an aggravated felony. (Leocal v. Ashcroft, 11/9/04)
CA1 On Habeas Review of Derivative Citizenship Claim
The court held that petitioner’s derivative citizenship claim was procedurally defaulted because petitioner could have, but did not seek direct review of the claim in the court of appeals. (Rivera-Martinez v. Ashcroft, 11/4/04)
CA7 Holds it Lacks Jurisdiction to Decide Whether Simple Possession is an AgFel
The court found that petitioners' simple possession offenses constituted controlled substance offenses which, under INA § 242(a)(2)(C), independently deprived the court of jurisdiction to review whether the offenses were aggravated felonies. (Yanez-Garcia v. Ashcroft, 11/2/04)
CA3 on OIL Procedures Permitting Remand in Persecution Cases
Under the new procedures, OIL, in consultation with EOIR and DHS, may remand cases involving persecution claims where the administrative record is out of date and not appropriate for judicial review. (Ambartsoumian v. Ashcroft, 11/1/04)
Minutes of 10/28/04 USCIS Liaison Meeting
The 10/28/04 meeting with USCIS' Operations and Legal offices included discussions on numerous issues, including 245(i) and (k), AC21, the RFE memo, the 800 number, expedites for persons in proceedings, security checks, Infopass, and ASC scheduling.
CA3 Remands for Panel Review of Novel Refugee Issue
The court found petitioner’s contention that the INS must first terminate refugee status before initiating removal proceedings “consistent with the text and some of the legislative history of the INA” and that the BIA erred in affirming without opinion. (Smriko v. Ashcroft, 10/26/04)
CA9 Refuses to Extend Lujan-Armendariz to Convictions That Have Not Yet Been Expunged
CA9 held that a state drug conviction that could be expunged and would otherwise qualify for first offender treatment, but has not yet been expunged, can serve as the basis for removal. (Chavez-Perez v. Ashcroft, 10/26/04)
CA10 Lacks Jurisdiction to Review Whether BIA Improperly Applied AWO Regulation
The court held that neither the INA nor the Administrative Procedure Act authorized its review of the BIA's decision to affirm petitioner’s appeal without opinion. (Tsegay v. Ashcroft, 10/26/04)
CA9 Finds Violation of the Right to Choice of Counsel
The court held that petitioners were denied their due process right to counsel of their choice when the IJ banned an entire law firm from representing them at their deportation hearing. (Baltazar-Alcazar v. Ashcroft, 10/21/04)
EOIR Memo on Contract Interpreter Services
EOIR memorandum 04-08, titled Contract Interpreter Services, establishes policy concerning the use of contract interpreter services during unscheduled telephonic interpreter services, hearings, and waivers. Memo supercedes 6/5/03 memo.
CA1 Dismisses Untimely Petition for Review in Reinstatement Case
The court dismissed the late-filed petition for review of a reinstatement order for lack of jurisdiction, noting that a separate petition for review would be appropriate if DHS denied Petitioner’s motion to reconsider. (Ponta-Garca v. Ashcroft, 10/20/04)
BIA Says "Violation" Does Not Equate to a "Conviction"
The BIA held that an alien found guilty of a "violation" under Oregon law does not have a "conviction" for immigration purposes under INA 101(a)(48)(A). (Matter of Eslamizar, 10/19/04)
Sign-On Letter to Members of Congress Regarding H.R. 10
A letter from AILA and other interested organizations to Members of Congress asking that they reject the divisive immigration provisions of the House-passed 9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act (H.R. 10).
CA4 Holds INA §101(a)(13)(C)(v) Cannot Be Applied Retroactively to LPR Returning From Abroad
CA4t held that the provision attached new legal consequences to petitioner’s pre-IIRIRA decision to plead guilty by subjecting him to removal proceedings as an LPR seeking entry into the US. (Olatunji v. Ashcroft, 10/19/04)
DHS Memo on Detention Prioritization and NTA Documentary Requirements
DHS 10/18/04 memorandum from DHS undersecretary Asa Hutchinson providing priorities for the detention of people and outlining documentary requirements which must be met when transferring people to ICE custody for removal proceedings. Courtesy of Peter D. Williamson.
CA5 Finds Contempt of Court Conviction Is An Aggravated Felony
The court held that petitioner’s conviction for refusing to testify before a grand jury in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 401(3) constituted an offense "relating to obstruction of justice” under INA § 101(a)(43)(S), and thus, an aggravated felony. (Alwan v. Ashcroft, 10/18/04)
CA9 Permits Post-Removal Habeas Review Over Citizenship Claim
The court held that petitioners have a Fifth Amendment right to review of colorable citizenship claims and may obtain such review via habeas corpus even after accepting deportation and waiving their right to appeal an IJ's decision. (Rivera v. Ashcroft, 10/18/04)
White House Letter Fails to Adequately Support Deletion of Harmful Immigration Provisions in HR 10
Letter from the White House to House & Senate intelligence reform bill conferees, dated 10/18/04, fails to adequately call for the deletion of all the harmful immigration provisions contained in the House-passed measure (H.R. 10).
Northern California District Court Certifies Class in LPR Documentation Case
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has certified the class in a lawsuit challenging the USCIS' refusal to issue documentation of permanent residence to individuals granted permanent resident status by EOIR. (Santillan v. Ashcroft, 10/12/04)
GAO Report on DHS Immigration Enforcement
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) finds that all of the legacy INS interior enforcement strategy objectives have been incorporated in DHS's Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Final Text of H.R. 10 as Passed by the House
Text of the 9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act as passed by the House on October 8, 2004.