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
ICE Memo on Removal Proceedings Involving Aliens with Military Service
A 6/21/04 memo from Marcy Foreman, ICE Acting Director, Office of Investigations, amending ICE policy on commencement of proceedings against aliens with military service, outlines factors to be considered in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion.
ICE Memo on the Issuance of NTAs, Administrative Orders, and Reinstatements
A 6/21/04 memo from ICE’s Office of Investigations Acting Director Marcy Forman on the exercise of prosecutorial discretion in the issuance of Notices to Appear, Administrative Orders, and Reinstatement of Final Removal Orders for individuals with U.S. military service.
ICE Announces Alternative Detention Program (Updated 6/18/04)
On June 17, 2004, ICE announced a detention pilot program to be conducted through a contractor company. ICE intends to place up to 200 individuals in each of 8 cities in alternative detention, such as electronic monitoring, home visits, work visits and telephone reporting.
EOIR Letter Discusses National Video Immigration Court
EOIR Director Kevin Rooney responds to letter from immigration groups, including AILA and AILF, regarding the upcoming national video immigration court.
ICE Detainee Transfer Standards
ICE policy on transfer of detainees detailing the procedures and notification requirements to followed when transferring a detainee. Courtesy of Christina DeConcini.
In Video Hearing Held in Two Circuits, CA7 Holds Petition for Review is Filed in IJ's Location
CA7 ruled that when an immigration hearing is simultaneously conducted in two different circuits as a result of video teleconferencing, INA § 242(b)(2) requires the filing of petitions for review in the circuit where the IJ was located and the order was issued. (Ramos v. Ashcroft, 6/15/04)
Revised BIA Practice Manual Now Available
EOIR has updated its BIA Practice Manual and Q&As.
EOIR to Start National Video Immigration Court
EOIR announced at the 2004 AILA annual conference that, on July 19, 2004, it will start a national immigration court to handle by video hearing overflow cases from other courts. It will start with the New Orleans docket. Charles Adkins-Blanch and David Neal will be the judges.
CA4 Finds it Lacks Authority to Reinstate or Stay Voluntary Departure Period in Permanent Rule Cases
The Fourth Circuit reasoned that IIRIRA’s changes to the INA, including the elimination of judicial review over the denial of a request for voluntary departure, withdrew the court’s ability to reinstate or stay the voluntary departure period. (Ngarurih v. Ashcroft, 6/10/04)
CA9 Limits Review to Official Record in Domestic Violence Removability Determination
Using the categorical approach set forth by the Supreme Court in Taylor v. United States, CA9 held that the IJ erred when he considered facts regarding petitioner’s domestic violence conviction which were not part of the official record of conviction. (Tokatly v. Ashcroft, 6/10/04)
CA1 on Jurisdiction Over IIRIRA Transitional Rule Cases
In transitional rule cases, judicial review is not barred by IIRIRA §309(c)(4)(G) unless the individual is charged with a criminal offense referenced in that section and is found deportable based on the offense. (Hernandez-Barrera v. Ashcroft, 6/9/04)
CA8 Finds Reasonable Cause Warrants Reopening In Absentia Order
CA8 found that the combination of traffic, petitioner’s inability to locate the immigration court and her child’s illness constituted reasonable cause warranting reopening of her in absentia exclusion order. (De Jimenez v. Ashcroft, 6/7/04)
CA9 Finds Unexcused Failure to Timely File Petition for Review Bars Habeas Corpus Review
CA9 addressed prudential exhaustion, holding that filing a petition for review constitutes a judicial remedy which, absent certain circumstances, must be exhausted before a petitioner may obtain habeas review. (Liang v. Ashcroft, 6/7/2004 & Acevedo-Carranza v. Ashcroft, 6/7/04)
CA9 Requires Claim-Based Exhaustion Before the BIA in Habeas Case
CA9 reasoned that mandating exhaustion in habeas actions did not conflict with the distinction between “judicial review” and “habeas corpus” in St. Cyr and held that petitioner failed to exhaust because he could have raised his claims with the BIA. (Sokha Sun v. Ashcroft, 6/4/04)
CA5 Holds That It Lacks Authority to Remedy an Unlawful Deportation on Habeas
While finding denial of petitioner’s prior habeas erroneous and his deportation thus unlawful, CA5 held it lacked current habeas authority to order the government to readmit petitioner or direct the BIA to provide petitioner with a new proceeding. (Zalawadia v. Ashcroft, 6/4/04)
CA1 Refuses to Reinstate Voluntary Departure Retroactively
The court found that its prior decision reinstating voluntary departure does not apply to retroactively to cure an overstay and affirmed the BIA’s denial of adjustment of status. (Khalil v. Ashcroft, 6/3/04)
CA9 Finds Bar to Review Where IJ Had Reason to Believe Illicit Drug Trafficking Activity
The Ninth Circuit held that the bar to judicial review of a removal order may apply when an Immigration Judge finds "reason to believe" the alien was involved in illicit drug trafficking. (Lopez-Molina v. Ashcroft, 6/2/04)
CA9 Finds that Voluntary Departure Period is Automatically Stayed in Pending Transitional Rule Cases
CA9 held that in transitional rule cases, the voluntary departure period does not begin to run until the circuit court’s mandate issues. (Elian v. Ashcroft, 6/2/04)
AILA/AILF Letter to EOIR on National Video Immigration Court
AILA, AILF and other organizations express to EOIR their concerns about the upcoming national video immigration court.
CA9 Adopts BIA’s Test for Determining Whether an Individual Has Effectuated an “Entry” Under Pre-IIRIRA Law
CA9 held that no entry was effectuated under former INA § 101(a)(13) when petitioner was detained before exiting the secondary inspection area (Sidhu v. Ashcroft, 5/27/04); and when INS failed to promptly issue a parole extension (Mariscal-Sandoval v. Ashcroft, 5/28/04)
CA9 Denies Motion for Stay of Voluntary Departure Period Filed After Expiration of Such Period
The Court reiterated that a petition for review does not automatically stay the voluntary departure period, and found that a Motion to Stay filed after the period expired is essentially a request to extend or reinstate the period. (Garcia v. Ashcroft, 5/27/04)
CA2 Says St. Cyr Does Not Extend to Conviction After Trial
The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in INS v. St. Cyr, that the repeal of §212(c) may not be applied retroactively to persons who pleaded guilty to deportable offenses, does not extend to persons convicted after trial. (Thom v. Ashcroft, 5/27/04)
CA11 Holds that Individuals Must Show Prejudice in MTRs Based on Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
CA11 held that individuals who file motions to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel must demonstrate in their motion how their prior counsel’s actions (or inactions) prejudiced their removal proceeding. (Dakane v. US Attorney General, 5/25/04)
CA3 Finds No Jurisdiction to Extend or Reinstate Expired Voluntary Departure
The court found no jurisdiction to extend or reinstate a period of voluntary departure that expired during pendency of an appeal, but a motion to stay the voluntary departure period based on inherent equitable powers may still apply. (Reynoso-Lopez v. Ashcroft, 5/25/04)
CA7 Reveals Government Procedures for Notifying Local Immigration Officials of Stay Orders
Noting the government’s failure to properly convey notice of a stay order, CA7 discussed the government’s procedures for communicating such stay orders to the appropriate local immigration office, and cited CA9's email notification system was cited as a model. (Dimitrov v. Ashcroft, 5/24/04)