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 Holds That DHS Need Not Provide Implementing Instrument to Establish That Respondents Are Subject to ACA
The BIA held that DHS need not provide an asylum cooperative agreement (ACA) implementing instrument or a full set of operative terms and criteria to show respondents are subject to the ACA for purposes of the safe third country bar. Matter of N–E–R–S–, et al., 29 I&N Dec. 753 (BIA 2026)
CA4 Holds That Virginia Embezzlement Is Not Categorically an Aggravated Felony Crime Involving Fraud or Deceit
The court held that embezzlement under Va. Code Ann. §18.2-111 is not categorically a crime involving fraud or deceit under INA §101(a)(43)(M)(i), because “fraudulently” in the statute means wrongful or felonious intent and the elements do not require concealment. (Ramos v. Blanche, 7/9/26)
CA9 Finds Counsel’s Failure to Notify Petitioners of BIA Decision and Petition for Review Deadline Was Grounds to Seek Reopening
The court held that the BIA abused its discretion in denying reopening based on ineffective assistance of counsel, incorrectly concluding it lacked authority over conduct before a different tribunal and finding a courtesy copy provided sufficient notice. (Menjivar-Ayala v. Blanche, 7/9/26)
CA2 Vacates CAT Denial Where Agency Failed to Assess Whether Former Gang Member’s Likely Detention in El Salvador Would Constitute Torture
The court held that the agency failed to properly assess whether petitioner’s likely detention in El Salvador, including prison conditions intentionally created and maintained by the government, would amount to torture, and thus remanded his CAT claim. (Aguilar-Villalobos v. Blanche, 7/8/26)
CA4 Vacates Particularly Serious Crime Finding Where BIA and IJ Failed to Meaningfully Analyze Offense’s Elements Before Underlying Facts
The court held that the BIA and the IJ failed to apply the two-step test required by Matter of N–A–M– in determining that the petitioner’s Virginia conviction for assault and battery against a family member was a particularly serious crime. (Guevara Martinez v. Blanche, 7/7/26)
CA9 Holds That Unrebutted Matter of Y–L– Presumption for Drug Trafficking Aggravated Felonies Triggered Danger-to-Community Presumption
The court held that Matter of Y–L–’s unrebutted presumption that drug trafficking aggravated felonies are particularly serious triggered the regulatory presumption of danger to the community, and no separate dangerousness determination was required. (Sarr v. Blanche, 7/7/26)
CA8 Declines to Review Unexhausted Cancellation of Removal Arguments Raised for First Time in Petition for Review
The court declined to address unexhausted arguments that the agency relied on the wrong statute to declare the petitioner ineligible for cancellation of removal based on her Nebraska negligent child abuse conviction and overlooked the petty-offense exception. (Lopez-Lopez v. Blanche, 7/7/26)
BIA Holds That Conscription Is Not a Standalone Asylum Basis and the Inhuman Conduct Exception Must Be Tethered to a Protected Ground
The BIA held that conscription is not a standalone asylum basis absent a nexus to a protected ground, and that conscription requiring inhuman conduct condemned by the international community is persecution only when tethered to a protected ground. Matter of R–A–N–, 29 I&N Dec. 739 (BIA 2026)
CA7 Holds That Reinstatement Orders Are Reviewable Final Orders and 30-Day Petition for Review Deadline Is Subject to Equitable Tolling
The court held that reinstatement orders are reviewable final orders of removal and that INA §242(b)(1)’s 30-day petition for review deadline is subject to equitable tolling where petitioners relied on binding pre-Riley circuit precedent. (E.E.V. and M.C.C.-G. v. Blanche, 7/6/26)
Recommendations on Protecting Individuals Impacted by Recent Earthquakes in Venezuela
AILA urges the Administration to take immediate action to ensure the safety and security of all people impacted by the recent earthquakes in Venezuela and to take affirmative steps to ensure that individuals are not forced to return to danger during the aftermath of the natural disaster.
CA4 Holds That Nominal Appeal of Removal Order Preserves CAT Review and Finds BIA Misapplied Clear-Error Review
The court held that noncitizens challenging only the result of withholding-only proceedings may preserve review of their CAT claims by filing a nominal appeal of their removal orders, and that BIA misapplied the clear error standard by reweighing the IJ’s findings. (Riley v. Blanche, 7/2/26)
EOIR Notice of Revision of Form EOIR-59, Certification and Release of Records
EOIR 60-day notice of revision and extension of Form EOIR-59, Certification and Release of Records. EOIR will add a field to the form to collect the name of a parent or guardian. Comments are due 8/31/26. (91 FR 40032, 7/1/26)
BIA Holds Bond Redetermination Venue Is the Immigration Court over the Place of Detention, Not Where Removal Case Is Pending
The BIA held that, under 8 CFR §1003.19(c)(1), the proper venue for a respondent’s request for bond redetermination is the immigration court having jurisdiction over the respondent’s place of detention. Matter of Vizcaino Aybar, 29 I&N Dec. 736 (BIA 2026)
BIA Holds IJ May Not Find Respondents Credible Solely for Candor in Admitting They Previously Lied to Obtain Immigration Benefits
The BIA sustained DHS’s appeal and remanded, holding that an IJ may not determine that a respondent is credible solely because the respondent was candid in admitting they previously lied to obtain immigration benefits. Matter of T–D–E–, et al., 29 I&N Dec. 732 (BIA 2026)
Practice Alert: Impacts of the Supreme Court Decision in Blanche v. Lau
The CBP Committee provides a resource with strategies for practitioners following the June 23, 2026, US Supreme Court ruling that CBP officers do not need to meet the “clear and convincing” standard that an LPR has committed an inadmissible offense before deeming them an “applicant for admission.”
Practice Pointer: A Reminder to Practitioners on Motions to Suppress
This practice pointer reminds AILA members to consider motions to suppress in removal proceedings, highlighting recent federal caselaw, immigration court practice trends, and practical tips on pleadings, declarations, corroboration, subpoenas, and appeal preservation.
BIA Holds That “Brazilian Children” and “Abandoned Brazilian Children” Lack Particularity and Reverses Humanitarian Asylum Grant
The BIA held that “Brazilian children” and “abandoned Brazilian children” lack sufficient particularity and that respondent, who did not show Brazil was unable or unwilling to control perpetrators, was ineligible for humanitarian asylum. Matter of A–G–O–F–, et al., 29 I&N Dec. 772 (BIA 2026)
BIA Denies Reopening Where Respondent Did Not Show Hardship for §212(h) Waiver or Warrant a Favorable Exercise of Discretion
The BIA held that the respondent did not show the extreme hardship required for a §212(h) waiver, let alone exceptional and extremely unusual hardship, and that his equities were outweighed by adverse factors, including sexual crime convictions. Matter of Y–S–P–T–, 29 I&N Dec. 776 (BIA 2026)
CA6 Holds That Photocopies of Drafted Letters and Bar Complaint Did Not Satisfy Lozada for Ineffective Assistance Claim
The court held that photocopies of a bar complaint and letters, without proof they were sent or filed, did not satisfy Matter of Lozada’s requirement of an actually filed complaint and notice to counsel, and upheld the BIA’s denial of the motion to reopen. (Morris v. Blanche, 6/25/26)
CA9 Finds Crime of Child Abuse under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i) Covers Criminally Negligent Child Endangerment by Parents and Nonparents Alike
The court held that the best reading of the INA crime of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment covers child endangerment, requires at least criminal negligence, and reaches nonparents, and denied the consolidated petitions for review. (Leon-Briviesca v. Blanche, 6/25/26)
BIA Upholds No-Bond Flight Risk Determination and Finds USCIS Adjustment Denial Admissible as Probative of Flight Risk
The BIA held that the IJ properly determined that the respondent posed a flight risk that could not be mitigated by a bond, and concluded that evidence USCIS denied his adjustment application was properly admitted as probative of flight risk. Matter of A–W–M–K–, 29 I&N Dec. 805 (BIA 2026)
CA9 Holds That Motion Premised on Evidence Not Before BIA Must Be Treated as Motion to Reopen, Making It Timely under 90-Day Deadline
The court held that a motion captioned as a motion to reopen and premised on evidence not before the BIA when it dismissed an untimely appeal must be treated as such, making it timely, and remanded for the BIA to apply the motion-to-reopen standard. (Garcia Corrales v. Blanche, 6/24/26)
Call for Plaintiffs: Clients Arrested During Kavanaugh Stops
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and ACLU are asking for help identifying potential plaintiffs for a lawsuit challenging ICE/CBP’s use of facial recognition during roving immigration stops (i.e., Kavanaugh stops). Plaintiffs should come from the 1st, 4th, or 9th Circuits.
Federal Judge Bars ICE from Conducting Most Courthouse Arrests and Exceeding 12-Hour Holding Cell Limit
A federal judge vacated ICE Directive 11072.3 and EOIR PM 25-06, which permitted civil arrests in courthouses, and ICE’s 6/24/25 “Nationwide Hold Room Waiver” memo, which allowed ICE to hold people in holding facilities for up to 72 hours. (Pablo Sequen v. Albarran, 6/23/26)
Practice Pointer: Habeas Corpus for People Originally Detained Near the Border Then Released
AILA’s Benefits Litigation Committee provides this practice pointer on Habeas Corpus for individuals detained near the border, then released, including on recognizance or parole under INA § 212(d)(5), and due process violations in ROR revocations and revocation of parole under § 212(d)(5).