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
BIA Overturns IJ's Denial of NACARA Suspension
In an unpublished decision dated 11/15/99, the BIA sustained the appeal of the immigration judge’s denial of suspension of deportation under §203 of the Nicaraguan and Central American Relief Act of 1997 (NACARA).
DOJ Exempts EOIR Files from Privacy Act
DOJ final rule exempting EOIR system of records "Practitioner Complaint/Disciplinary Files," (Justice /EOIR-003) from the Privacy Act. Rule is effective 11/15/99. (64 FR 61786, 11/15/99)
Report from EOIR Liaison Meeting (11/8/99)
Report of the 11/8/99 meeting between AILA and EOIR where the proposed Rules of Professional Responsibility were discussed. AILA raised concerns that the changes provided for harsh penalties for a wide range of conduct and did not apply to trial attorneys. Minutes prepared by Royal F. Berg.
EOIR Liaison Meeting Minutes (11/8/99)
Liaison minutes from the EOIR/AILA liaison meeting that was held on November 8, 1999.
Amicus Brief in Fu v. Reno
Amicus brief filed in Texas by AILF in support of plaintiff's motion for reconsideration in Fu v. Reno, (N.D.Tex.) arguing that the court has jurisdiction over the matter.
BIA on Transition Period Custody Rules
The BIA held that INA 236(c) does not apply to aliens whose most recent release from custody by an authority other than the INS occurred prior to the expiration of the Transition Period Custody Rules. (Matter of Adeniji, 11/3/99)
BIA Says "Actions Taken" Include BIA Appeals
The BIA held that the term "actions taken" in IIRIRA 321(c), which limits the applicability of the aggravated felony definition, includes consideration of a case by the BIA such that the definition is applicable to cases decided by the Board on or after 9/30/96. (Matter of Truong, 10/20/99)
DOJ Final Rule on Streamlined Appellate Review Procedure for BIA
DOJ final rule, amending 8 CFR Part 3, authorizing single Board members to summarily affirm certain rulings and to adjudicate on merits certain other rulings, as an effort to streamline the appellate review procedure. Rule effective 10/18/99. (64 FR 56135, 10/18/99)
BIA and IJ Have Jurisdiction to Review Denial of 209(c) Waiver
The BIA held that immigration judges and BIA have jurisdiction to adjudicate an alien’s request for a waiver of inadmissibility under to INA §209(c), following INS’s denial of such waiver. (Matter of H-N-, 10/13/99)
BIA Upholds IJ's Order of Removal
The BIA held that the IJ’s failure to expressly explain the basis for the removal decision, while inappropriate, did not necessitate remand for issuance of full and separate decision. (Matter of Rodriguez-Carrillo, 10/12/99)
EOIR Liaison Update from Roundtable Discussion at National Conference
EOIR update by Royal F. Berg and Carlina Tapia-Ruano from roundtable discussion with senior EOIR officials at national conference in Seattle. Also appeared in the October 1999 AILA Monthly Mailing.
Presidential Memorandum Deferring Liberian Deportation for One Year
Memorandum to the Attorney General from President Clinton deferring deportation of Liberian nationals who were present in the U.S. as of 09/29/99.
DOJ Proposed Rule on Exemption of Records Under the Privacy Act
DOJ proposed rule on the exemption of EOIR records from the Privacy Act, exemptions are necessary to avoid interference with the law and regulatory enforcement functions of EOIR. Comments are due by 10/12/99. (64 FR 49117, 9/10/99)
AAO Declares Bond Breached When Subject Failed to Appear
AAO dismissed the obligor’s appeal, upholding the breach of a $3,500 delivery bond after the obligor failed to present the bonded alien for removal.
BIA Says Physical Presence Can Accrue After Service of OSC
In an unpublished decision, the BIA held that the required period of continuous physical presence can be accrued after service of an Order to Show Cause in suspension of deportation cases.
BIA Finds No Jurisdiction Over Motion to Remand
The BIA held that where an alien files a motion to remand during the pendency of an appeal from an IJ's denial of a motion to reopen and more than 90 days have passed since entry of the final administrative decision, the motion is time-barred. (Matter of L-V-K-, 8/10/99)
BIA on Duty of IJ to Provide Information on Voluntary Departure
The BIA held that if the record does not indicate that an alien has been convicted of an aggravated felony or charged with deportability under INA 237(a)(4), the IJ has a duty to provide the alien with information about voluntary departure. (Matter of Cordova, 8/6/99)
EOIR Correction on Deadline for NACARA Motions to Reopen
EOIR published a correction notice announcing that the actual due date for motions to reopen NACARA cases is 11/18/99. The original notice specified a set number of days for the deadline, but not an actual date. (64 FR 42146, 8/3/99)
BIA on Commencement of Proceedings for VWP Travelers
The BIA held that under 8 CFR §217.4(a)(1), proceedings against an alien who has been refused admission under the Visa Waiver Program and who has applied for asylum must be commenced with a Notice of Referral to Immigration Judge (Form I-863). (Matter of Kanagasundram, 7/29/99)
EOIR Provides Deadline to File NACARA Motions to Reopen
EOIR notice that individuals who filed an abbreviated motion to reopen their cases, on or before 9/11/98, in order to apply for benefits under NACARA, must complete the motion to reopen within 150 days from 6/21/99. (64 FR 40389, 7/26/99)
BIA on MTRs Based on Changed Circumstances
The BIA held that aliens seeking to reopen exclusion proceedings to apply for asylum or withholding based on changed circumstances who meet the general requirements for MTRs need not demonstrate "reasonable cause" for failure to appear. (Matter of A-N- & R-M-N-, 7/23/99)
AILF-AILA Comment to May 21 NACARA Rule
AILF and AILA submitted a joint comment letter July 15, 1999 to the INS interim rule on NACARA.
BIA on Timing of MTRs Following Judicial Review
The BIA held that a motion to reopen a decision of the Board following judicial review is untimely if it is filed more than 90 days after the date of the Board's decision, even if the motion is filed within 90 days of the order of the court. (Matter of Susma, 6/24/99)
INS Notice on Corrected Interim Rule on NACARA
INS notice concerning an omission in the interim rule published 5/21/99 about applicants for suspension of deportation and special rule cancellation of removal for certain nationals of Guatemala, El Salvador, and former Soviet bloc countries. (64 FR 33386, 6/23/99)
BIA Rejects Domestic Violence/Political Opinion Claim
The BIA held that where a victim of domestic violence fails to introduce meaningful evidence that her husband's behavior was influenced by his perception of her opinion, she has not demonstrated harm on account of political opinion or imputed political opinion. (Matter of R-A-, 6/11/99)