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 Issues Policy Memo on Updated Adjournment, Call-up, and Case Identification Codes
EOIR issued PM 21-28, concurrently rescinding and cancelling PM 21-07. EOIR updated its adjournment, call-up, and case identification codes to track and report on cases pending and completed before immigration courts and BIA. Codes are in the EOIR Policy Manual. Memo is effective 9/16/21.
Practice Alert: Impact of Litigation on the Exercise of Prosecutorial Discretion Under January 2021 Interim Guidance
On August 19, 2021, a federal district court issued an injunction prohibiting implementation of several memos that provided guidance on prosecutorial discretion (PD). This practice alert provides updated information on the availability of PD and resources for requesting PD.
CA5 Grants Partial Stay on Preliminary Injunction of Biden’s Enforcement Priorities Memos
The court granted a stay of the preliminary injunction pending appeal to allow DHS/ICE to rely on Biden’s enforcement priorities memos, in all respects, except for detained individuals subject to mandatory detention or ordered removed. (Texas, et al. v. United States, et al., 9/15/21)
DHS OIG Releases Report on Violation of ICE Detention Standards at Otay Mesa Detention Center
DHS OIG conducted unannounced inspections of the Otay Mesa Detention Center to evaluate compliance with ICE detention standards and COVID-19 requirements. As standards were not met for grievances, staff-detainee communications, segregation, OIG made seven recommendations and ICE concurred with six.
We Know Litigation Works, But How Do You Get Started?
In this blog post, expert litigator and past AILA president Ron Klasko gives a few examples of cases that could benefit from litigation, and highlights the upcoming Federal Court Conference as a chance to learn skills to help your clients.
DHS Releases Statement on Immigration Enforcement During Tropical Storm Nicholas
DHS announced it is monitoring Tropical Storm Nicholas, and absent extraordinary circumstances, immigration enforcement will not be conducted at locations where disaster and emergency relief related to this storm is being provided.
EOIR Provides Information on Model Hearing Program
EOIR updated their description of the Model Hearing Program (MHP) in Chapter 1.5 of Part V. The MHP is an educational program with the goals of improving the quality of advocacy before the immigration courts and increasing levels of pro bono representation for noncitizens in proceedings before EOIR.
CA3 Concludes That Petitioner’s Federal Conviction for Aggravated Identity Theft Is a CIMT
The court held that the petitioner’s conviction for aggravated identity theft in violation of 18 USC §1028A(a)(1) was a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) because it requires fraudulent intent, and thus, he was removable under INA §237(a)(2)(A)(ii). (Sasay v. Att’y Gen., 9/10/21)
CA9 Says California Conviction for Child Endangerment Is Not a “Crime of Child Abuse, Child Neglect, or Child Abandonment”
Granting the petition for review, the court held that felony child endangerment in violation of California Penal Code §273a(a) does not constitute a “crime of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment” within the meaning of INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i). (Diaz-Rodriguez v. Garland, 9/10/21)
CA9 Says IJ Provided Sufficient Safeguards During Removal Proceedings to Accommodate Petitioner’s Mental Illness
The court held that petitioner, a lawful permanent resident who had been found mentally incompetent, had received adequate safeguards in his removal proceedings, and had failed to exhaust his claim regarding the IJ’s “particularly serious crime” determination. (Benedicto v. Garland, 9/9/21)
CA9 Concludes IJ’s Finding That Petitioner Was Not a Christian Was Unsupported by Substantial Evidence (Withdrawn)
The court held that the law-of-the-case doctrine did not require it to accept a prior panel’s determination that the petitioner was not a Christian, and found he was not required to reattach his application for relief to his motion to reopen. (Etemadi v. Garland, 9/9/21, withdrawn 6/23/22)
CA11 Holds That Petitioner’s Two Simple Battery Convictions in Georgia Qualified as Aggravated Felonies Under the INA
The court concluded that each of the petitioner’s two Georgia convictions for simple battery under OCGA Section 16-5-23 was “a crime of violence … for which the term of imprisonment [was] at least one year” within the meaning of INA §101(a)(43)(F). (Talamantes-Enriquez v. Att’y Gen., 9/9/21)
CA11 Finds Petitioner Failed to Preserve Whether His Defective NTA Violated BIA’s Claim-Processing Rules
The court held that petitioner had failed to preserve whether his defective Notice to Appear (NTA) violated BIA’s claim-processing rules, and found he was removable for his controlled substance conviction, or alternatively, his second-degree assault conviction. (Farah v. Att’y Gen., 9/8/21)
CA9 Holds That Single Factor Rule Conflicts with REAL ID Act of 2005
The en banc court overruled prior circuit precedents establishing and applying the single factor rule, which required the court to sustain an adverse credibility determination by the BIA if one of the agency’s identified grounds was supported by substantial evidence. (Alam v. Garland, 9/8/21)
CA9 Upholds BIA’s Refusal to Allow Petitioner to Seek Asylum in Light of Reinstatement of His Prior Removal Order
The court held that because the petitioner’s prior removal order was reinstated, he had no right under the INA to seek asylum and no constitutional right to have DHS consider whether, as a discretionary matter, to decline to reinstate that order. (Iraheta-Martinez v. Garland, 9/7/21)
CA2 Says Matter of Soram’s Holding Applies Retroactively to Render Petitioner Removable
The court concluded that the holding in the BIA’s 2010 decision in Matter of Soram applied retroactively to the petitioner’s 2006 New York conviction for child endangerment, and thus the petitioner was removable. (Marquez v. Garland, 9/7/21)
DHS OIG Releases Report on ICE’s Management of COVID-19
DHS OIG released a report on ICE’s management of COVID-19 in detention facilities, and whether the health and safety of staff and detainees was safeguarded. Finding insufficient testing and generally ineffective oversight, OIG made six recommendations for improvement and ICE concurred.
AILA Submits Amicus Brief to Supreme Court on Discretionary Relief
AILA submitted an amicus brief in Patel v. Garland urging the Supreme Court to reverse the decision of the Eleventh Circuit and find that all threshold eligibility determinations relating to the enumerated forms of relief in 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) are subject to judicial review.
Notice of New “DHS/OIDO–001 Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman” System of Records
DHS notice of a new system of records titled “DHS/Office of the Immigration Detention (OIDO)–001 Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman System of Records.” The new system is effective upon publication of the notice. Comments are due 10/4/21. (86 FR 49553, 9/3/21)
DHS Proposed Rule Exempting “DHS/OIDO–001 Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman” System of Records from Privacy Act
DHS notice of proposed rulemaking to exempt portions of the newly established “DHS/OIDO–001 Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman” system of records from certain provisions of the Privacy Act. Comments are due 10/4/21. (86 FR 49490, 9/3/21)
CA9 Says Peruvian Petitioner Failed to Show That His Parents Obtained a “Legal Separation” for Purposes of Derivative Citizenship
The court concluded that the petitioner had failed to present sufficient evidence to permit a rational trier of fact to find that his parents had obtained a “legal separation” as required for him to derive U.S. citizenship under former §321(a) of the INA. (Ghia v. Garland, 9/2/21)
CA3 Finds BIA Erred in Denying Motion to Reopen Where IJ Failed to Meaningfully Evaluate Whether Interpreter Was Needed
The court held that the petitioner, who spoke “Pidgin” English, was denied due process, because the IJ did not conduct an adequate initial evaluation of whether an interpreter was needed and took no action even after the language barrier became apparent. (B.C. v. Att’y Gen., 9/1/21)
CA9 Finds Substantial Evidence Supported Adverse Credibility Determination as to Salvadoran Petitioner Threatened by Gang
The court held that, in making an adverse credibility determination as to petitioner, the IJ was allowed to afford substantial weight to discrepancies associated with a threat by gang members and a report the petitioner procured and submitted to the IJ. (Rodriguez-Ramirez v. Garland, 9/1/21)
CA5 Says Evidence Did Not Compel Conclusion That Honduran Government Officials Would Acquiesce in Petitioner’s Torture
The court upheld the denial of Convention Against Torture (CAT) relief to the petitioner, finding that the evidence did not compel the conclusion that any torture by the MS-13 gang would occur with the consent or acquiescence of Honduran officials. (Tabora Gutierrez v. Garland, 8/31/21)
CA3 Finds Petitioner Who Was a Naturalized Citizen at Time of Criminal Conviction Cannot Be Removed Under Aggravated Felony Provision
The court held that, because the petitioner was a naturalized citizen at the time of his conviction for a felony relating to conspiracy to illicitly traffic controlled substances, he was not removable under INA §237(a)(2)(A)(iii)’s aggravated felony provision. (Singh v. Att’y Gen., 8/31/21)