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 Releases FAQs on Enforcement Actions Involving Noncitizen Crime Victims
ICE released FAQs related to its policy update regarding civil immigration enforcement actions involving noncitizen crime victims, including applicants for and beneficiaries of victim-based immigration benefits.
EOIR Announces New Format for BIA Unpublished Decisions
EOIR announced that effective August 9, 2021, the BIA will begin transitioning to a new format for unpublished decisions. The new format is similar to that used for federal court decisions.
CA8 Upholds Denial of Motion to Reopen Based on Changed Country Conditions in Somalia
The court held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the petitioner’s motion to reopen, where the evidence showed that the poor conditions facing homosexuals and Christians in Somalia have remained substantially similar since the time of her hearing. (Yusuf v. Garland, 8/9/21)
AILA and Partners Submit Amicus Brief on Notice to Appear Failure of INA §239 (a)(1)
AILA and partners submitted a brief arguing that the requirements in INA §239(a)(1) are, at a minimum, mandatory claim processing rules that must be enforced whenever a respondent timely objects to a non-compliant Notice to Appear (NTA) and termination is the proper remedy for the violations.
CA5 Says It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review BIA’s Prima Facie Hardship Determination Pursuant to INA §242(a)(2)(B)(i)
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA’s finding that the petitioner had not presented prima facie evidence of her eligibility for cancellation of removal pursuant to INA §242(a)(2)(B)(i). (Parada-Orellana v. Garland, 8/6/21)
CRS Releases Report on In Absentia Removal Order Rates
CRS provided an In Focus that explained the legal requirements for in absentia removal orders, how EOIR calculates in absentia rates, how to interpret those rates, and more.
CA9 Remands for BIA to Consider Petitioner’s Social Group Claim Based on His Perceived Gang Membership
The court remanded for the BIA to consider in the first instance whether the petitioner was eligible for withholding of removal on account of his membership in the particular social group of “people erroneously believed to be gang members.” (Vasquez-Rodriguez v. Garland, 8/5/21)
CA11 Finds Florida Conviction for Being a Felon in Possession of a Firearm Is Not a “Firearm Offense” Under the INA
The court held that the petitioner’s conviction in Florida under Fla. Stat. §790.23(1)(a) for being a felon in possession of a firearm did not constitute a “firearm offense” within the meaning of INA §237(a)(2)(C) and its cross-reference to 18 USC §921(a)(3). (Simpson v. Att’y Gen., 8/4/21)
CA8 Finds “Mexican Mothers Who Refuse to Work for the Cartel” Is Not a PSG
The court held that the BIA did not err in finding that the petitioner’s proposed particular social group (PSG) of “Mexican mothers who refuse to work for the Cartel Jalisco Nueva Generación” was not sufficiently particularized or socially distinct. (Rosales-Reyes v. Garland, 8/4/21)
AILA Submits Amicus Brief on the Application of the Persecutor Bar
AILA submitted an amicus brief in Negusie v. Garland, arguing that the BIA decision that allows an individual to be returned on mere speculation that the persecutor bar might possibly apply is “utterly inconsistent” with Congress’s intent.
CA8 Finds BIA Did Not Err in Excluding Petitioner’s Mental Health Issues from PSC Analysis
The court found that because petitioner had failed to rebut the presumption set out in the Attorney General’s decision in In re Y-L-, the BIA did not err in not considering her mental health as a factor in the particularly serious crime (PSC) analysis. (Gilbertson v. Garland, 8/2/21)
CA4 Upholds BIA’s Asylum Denial to Former Member of MS-13 Gang in El Salvador
The court upheld the BIA’s denial of asylum to the Salvadoran petitioner, finding that his proposed particular social groups of “former members of MS-13” and “former members of MS-13 who leave for moral reasons” were overbroad and lacked social distinction. (Nolasco v. Garland, 8/2/21)
CA9 Holds That Convictions Under Hawaii’s Fourth Degree Theft Statute Are Not Categorically CIMTs
The court held that Hawaii’s fourth degree theft statute, a petty misdemeanor involving property of less than $250, is overbroad with respect to the BIA’s definition of a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) and is indivisible, and granted the petition for review. (Maie v. Garland, 8/2/21)
BIA Finds Tennessee Aggravated Statutory Rape Is Categorically a “Crime of Child Abuse”
The BIA sustained the DHS appeal and found that the offense of aggravated statutory rape under the Tennessee Code Annotated is categorically a “crime of child abuse” within the meaning of INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i). Matter of Aguilar-Barajas, 28 I&N Dec. 354 (BIA 2021)
AILA Recommendations on Biden Administration Enforcement Priorities
AILA offers recommendations to DHS on how to improve the interim enforcement priorities and ensure consistent implementation.
EOIR Releases FAQs Related to COVID and Immigration Courts
EOIR, consistent with public health officials’ guidance, released FAQs on its implemented practices related to COVID and immigration courts.
DHS Issues Statement on Expedited Removal Flights for Certain Families
DHS announced that it resumed expedited removal flights for certain families who recently arrived at the southern border, cannot be expelled under Title 42, and do not have a legal basis to stay in the United States. CBP returned individuals to Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras.
DHS Publishes Notification of Prior Ratification of Final Rule on Changes Applicable to Surety Bond Companies
DHS published notification in the Federal Register of Secretary Mayorkas’s 4/15/21 ratification of the final rule entitled “Procedures and Standards for Declining Surety Immigration Bonds and Administrative Appeal Requirement for Breaches.” (86 FR 40919, 7/30/21)
CA7 Holds That Nigerian Petitioner Was Removable for Having Procured Her Entry Visa by Fraud and Was Not Entitled to Asylum
The court found that the adverse credibility findings of the IJs as to petitioner and her ex-husband were supported by substantial evidence, and upheld the IJs’ conclusions that petitioner was removable based on her sham marriage and was not entitled to asylum. (Omowole v. Garland, 7/29/21)
CA8 Denies Cancellation of Removal to Petitioner Who Claimed He Was Battered by LPR Parent
The court concluded that the petitioner had failed to exhaust his claim that the BIA engaged in improper factfinding, and that it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA’s ultimate decision denying cancellation of removal as a matter of discretion. (Mencia-Medina v. Garland, 7/29/21)
CA5 Says Petitioner Failed to Show Nexus Between Her Fear of Mexican Drug Cartel and Her Immediate Family
The court upheld the denial of asylum as to the petitioner, who feared she would be killed or tortured by the Zetas in Mexico, finding that the BIA and IJ correctly concluded that familial ties did not sufficiently motivate the Zetas to target petitioner. (Vazquez-Guerra v. Garland, 7/29/21)
CA6 Upholds Asylum Denial Where Petitioner Failed to Show Guatemalan Government Was Unable or Unwilling to Control Her Abuser
The court held that its recent decision in Juan Antonio v. Barr did not undermine the BIA’s rejection of the petitioner’s claim that the Guatemalan government was unable or unwilling to control her ex-boyfriend’s abuse. (Gonzalez Ortiz v. Garland, 7/28/21)
CA2 Reverses Adverse Credibility Determination as to Petitioner Seeking Relief from Political Persecution in India
Where the petitioner sought relief from political persecution in India, the court found that the IJ’s adverse credibility finding was not supported by substantial evidence, concluding that a trivial inconsistency by itself did not reasonably justify the finding. (Singh v. Garland, 7/28/21)
CA4 Holds That It Has Jurisdiction to Review “Exceptional and Extremely Unusual Hardship” Standard for Cancellation Purposes
The court held that INA §240A(b)(1)(D)’s standard of “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” presents a mixed question of law and fact, which it retains jurisdiction to review under the Supreme Court’s decision in Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr. (Gonzalez Galvan v. Garland, 7/27/21)
Biden Administration’s Latest Move Does Real Harm to Asylum-Seeking Families
AILA denounced the Biden administration for plans announced to apply expedited removal to families apprehended in the southern border region; AILA is adamantly opposed and urges the administration to rethink this decision.