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
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)
BIA Says Misprision of a Felony Is Not an Aggravated Felony Under INA 101(a)(43)(S)
The BIA held that misprision of a felony is not an aggravated felony obstruction of justice offense under INA 101(a)(43)(S). (Matter of Espinoza-Gonzalez, 6/11/99)
BIA Says False Statements to Asylum Officer Is False Testimony
The BIA held that for purposes of INA 101(f)(6), false oral statements under oath to an asylum officer can constitute false testimony as defined by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Phinpathya v. INS. (Matter of R-S-J-, 6/10/99)
BIA on Foreign Policy Grounds of Deportability
The BIA held that a letter from the DOS Secretary stating reasonable and bona fide reasons for finding that the alien's presence would have serious foreign policy consequences is sufficient evidence that the alien is deportable under INA 241(a)(4)(C)(i). (Matter of Ruiz-Massieu, 6/10/99)
EOIR Response AILA Seminar Questions
Responses from EOIR to questions prepared by Royal Berg and Maureen O'Sullivan at the AILA Town Meeting in March 1999. The responses were prepared 6/7/99 by EOIR Acting General Counsel Chuck Adkins-Blanch.
BIA on Discretion to Grant Voluntary Departure
The BIA held that although an alien who applies for voluntary departure under INA 240B(a) or (b) must establish that a favorable exercise of discretion is warranted, the IJ has broader authority to grant relief before the conclusion of proceedings. (Matter of Arguelles-Campos, 6/7/99)
BIA Says INS Met Burden of Establishing Deportability of Minor
The BIA found that the INS met its burden of establishing a minor's deportability where (1) Form I-213 was submitted; (2) the respondent made no challenge to its admissibility; and (3) admission of the Form I-213 would not be fundamentally unfair. (Matter of Ponce-Hernandez, 5/28/99)
BIA on Mandatory Detention of LPRs
The BIA held that an LPR will not be considered "properly included" in a mandatory detention category when the IJ or the BIA finds that it is substantially unlikely that the INS will prevail on a charge of removability. (Matter of Joseph, 5/28/99)
BIA on Espionage Grounds of Deportability
The BIA held that INA 241(a) does not require that the alien engaged in an act of espionage or was convicted of an espionage offense; knowledge of, or having received instruction in espionage or counter-espionage of a foreign government is sufficient. (Matter of Luis-Rodriguez, 5/26/99)
INS Proposed Rule on Public Charge Grounds
INS proposed rule establishing clear standards governing a determination that an alien is inadmissible or ineligible to adjust status, or has become deportable, on public charge grounds. (64 FR 28676, 5/26/99)
BIA Upholds Matter of Arthur on Motions to Reopen
The BIA held that Matter of Arthur, which requires an approved immediate relative visa petition before a case may be reopened for AOS is not inconsistent with the motions to reopen regulations at 8 CFR §§3.2(c)(2) and 3.23(b)(4)(i). (Matter of H-A-, 5/25/99)
BIA Says IJ May Grant Public Charge Waiver
The BIA found that IJs have jurisdiction to grant a waiver of inadmissibility under INA 213 and are required to advise an alien found to be inadmissible as a public charge under section 212(a)(4)(B) of his or her right to apply for a waiver. (Matter of Ulloa, 5/24/99)
BIA Says In Absentia Motion Must Be Filed with the IJ
The BIA lacks jurisdiction to consider an appeal from an in absentia order in removal proceedings because INA 240(b)(5)(C) provides that such an order may only be rescinded by filing a motion to reopen with the IJ. (Matter of Guzman-Arguera, 5/24/99)
BIA Finds INA 275 Is Not an Aggravated Felony
The BIA held that an alien convicted of an offense described in INA 275(a) is not convicted of an aggravated felony under section 101(a)(43)(N), which specifically refers to alien smuggling offenses described in INA 274(a)(1)(A) and (2). (Matter of Alvarado-Alvino, 5/24/99)
BIA on Analysis of Divisible Statutes
The BIA held that where the state statute of conviction is divisible, it is necessary to look to the record of conviction and other documents to determine whether the specific offense constitutes an aggravated felony. (Matter of Sweetser, 5/19/99)
BIA Says Texas DWI Is Not a CIMT
In an unpublished decision, the BIA held that a misdemeanor DWI conviction under Tex. Penal Code Ann. Sec. 49.09 (1998) is not a crime involving moral turpitude. (Matter of Reyes-Torres, 5/16/99)
EOIR Policy on UN Convention Against Torture
EOIR memo from the Office of the Chief Immigration Judge, dated May 14, 1999, on operating policies and procedures for the implementation of Article 3 of the UN Convention Against Torture.
BIA Holds Stop-Time Rule Applies on Date Offense Committed
The BIA held that under INA 240A(d)(1), continuous residence or physical presence for cancellation of removal purposes is deemed to end on the date a qualifying offense has been committed. (Matter of Perez, 5/12/99)
District Court Rejects Deportation/Exclusion Distinction
Concluded that the INS's application of § 440(d) to preclude applications for discretionary relief from aliens in deportation proceedings, but not from aliens in exclusion proceedings, is a violation of equal protection. (Merdcado-Amador v. Reno, 5/4/99)
INS v. Aguirre-Aguirre
Supreme Court ruling on granting cert stating, 'we disagree with the Court of Appeals and address each of the three specific areas in which it found the BIA's analysis deficient. We reverse the judgment of the court and remand for further proceedings.' (INS v. Aguirre-Aguirre, 5/3/99)