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 Provides Information on Legal Access in Detention
ICE provided information to assist immigration legal representatives with clients who are detained in ICE custody, including information on how to communicate with detained individuals and with ICE, available legal resources available to detained individuals, and contact information.
Round Table of Former Immigration Judges Issue Statement in Support of AILA NJ Chapter’s Litigation
On September 1, 2020, the Round Table of Former Immigration Judges issued a statement supporting the AILA NJ Chapter’s litigation and urging the Newark Immigration Court to adopt proper health and safety measures for litigants and staff while protecting fundamental due process rights.
EOIR 30-Day Notice and Request for Comments on Proposed Revisions to Form EOIR-27
EOIR 30-day notice and request for comments on proposed revisions to Form EOIR-27, Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative Before the Board of Immigration Appeals. Comments are due 10/1/20. (85 FR 54222, 9/1/20)
CA1 Overturns Preliminary Injunction Against ICE Arrests in Massachusetts’ Courthouses
The court concluded that the plaintiffs had failed to demonstrate that they were likely to succeed in showing that the INA implicitly incorporates a common law privilege against civil arrests for individuals attending court on official business. (Ryan, et al. v. ICE, et al., 9/1/20)
BIA Rules on Failure to File an Application for Relief by Deadline Set by Immigration Judge
The BIA ruled that after a deadline for filing relief has been set, the opportunity to file may be waived. Further, that being detained, appearing pro se, and using an interpreter at a video hearing do not constitute a denial of due process. Matter of R-C-R-, 28 I&N Dec. 74 (BIA 2020)
Judge Bars CBP Agents from Conducting Credible Fear Interviews
Granting the plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction, a district court judge barred CBP agents, who receive substantially less training than USCIS asylum officers, from conducting credible fear interviews for asylum seekers. (A.B.-B. v. Morgan, 8/31/20)
AILA and Partners Submit Amicus Brief on Barriers for Detained, Pro Se Asylum Seekers
AILA and partners submitted an amicus brief in the Third Circuit arguing that because of the hurdles detained, pro se asylum seekers face in presenting evidence to support their claims, the BIA must factor a pro se respondent’s detention into analysis of whether evidence is “reasonably available.”
CA8 Finds District Court Correctly Dismissed Petitioners’ Request for Nunc Pro Tunc Adjustment of Status
The court held that the district court properly dismissed the petitioners’ request for nunc pro tunc adjustment of status, because they had failed to adjust their status to lawful permanent residents, and thus could not meet the requirements for naturalization. (Al-Saadoon v. Barr, 8/28/20)
AILA Quicktake #291: USCIS Issues Guidance on DACA to Implement DHS Memo
On August 21, 2020, USCIS issued guidance on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program implementing the memo issued in July 2020 by Acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf. Kate Voight, AILA’s Senior Associate Director of Government Relations, summarizes key points from the guidance.
DOJ Proposes Regulation to Turn Immigration Appeals into Tool of the Administration’s Anti-Immigrant Agenda
AILA Senior Policy Counsel Laura Lynch and AILA First Vice President Jeremy McKinney respond to a new rule proposed by DOJ that would overhaul Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) processes.
EOIR Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Appellate Procedures and Administrative Closure
EOIR notice of proposed rulemaking proposing multiple changes to the processing of immigration appeals, as well as amending the regulations regarding administrative closure. Comments are due 9/25/20. (85 FR 52491, 8/26/20)
CA11 Finds BIA Erred in Retroactively Applying Stop-Time Rule to Pre-IIRAIRA Conviction of Petitioner Seeking Cancellation
The court held that because the petitioner had pled guilty before the stop-time rule was enacted via the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA), applying the stop-time rule retroactively to his conviction was impermissible. (Rendon v. Att’y Gen., 8/26/20)
CA9 Defers to BIA’s Interpretation of Perjury and Holds That Conviction for Perjury in California Is an Aggravated Felony
Deferring to the BIA’s interpretation of “perjury” as used in the aggravated felony definition of INA §101(a)(43)(S), the court held that perjury under section 118(a) of the California Penal Code is an aggravated felony. (Yim v. Barr, 8/25/20)
CA9 Reverses IJ’s and BIA’s Adverse Credibility Determination as to Asylum-Seeking Member of Minority Somali Clan
The court held that substantial evidence did not support the IJ’s and BIA’s adverse credibility determination, finding that, in light of the totality of the circumstances, the evidence compelled the conclusion that the Somali petitioner’s testimony was credible. (Iman v. Barr, 8/25/20)
CA3 Holds That “Substantial Evidence” Standard of Review Applies to an IJ’s Reasonable Fear Determinations
After holding that the substantial evidence standard applies to an IJ’s reasonable fear determinations, the court found that substantial evidence supported the IJ’s conclusion that the Mexican petitioner did not have a reasonable fear of persecution or torture. (Romero v. Att’y Gen., 8/25/20)
CA5 Upholds Denial of Motion to Reopen Where BIA Found Petitioner Had Failed to Pursue His Rights Diligently
The court held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in finding that the Mexican petitioner’s motion to reopen, which was filed seven years after the entry of his removal order, was untimely and not entitled to equitable tolling. (Flores-Moreno v. Barr, 8/24/20)
CA1 Finds Petitioner’s Conviction in Massachusetts for Drug Possession with Intent to Distribute Was an Aggravated Felony
The court held that the petitioner’s Massachusetts’ drug conviction for possession with the intent to distribute amounted to “illicit trafficking in a controlled substance” and was thus an aggravated felony under INA §101(a)(43)(B). (Soto-Vittini v. Barr, 8/24/20)
CA1 Upholds BIA’s Denial of Motion to Reconsider Where Petitioner’s VAWA Self-Petition Was Pending
Where the petitioner had premised his motion to reopen on a pending Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) self-petition, the court upheld the denial of his motion to reconsider, holding that the BIA did not err by finding he had failed to make a prima facie case. (Franjul-Soto v. Barr, 8/24/20)
CA9 Says Petitioner Seeking to Reopen Proceedings Was Not Required to Attach a New Application for Relief
The court held that the BIA abused its discretion in finding that a noncitizen who seeks to reopen an earlier application for relief, and attaches that application to the motion, has failed to attach the “appropriate application for relief” under 8 CFR §1003.2(c)(1). (Aliyev v. Barr, 8/24/20)
Senators Call for GAO Investigation into the Politicization and Mismanagement of Immigration Courts as COVID-19 Crisis Rages
On 8/21/20, Senators Durbin (D-IL), Whitehouse (D-RI), and Hirono (D-HI) led all Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats in sending a request to the GAO to investigate the politicization of the immigration courts and EOIR’s mismanagement of the immigration courts during the COVID-19 pandemic.
USCIS Issues Guidance on Implementing DHS Acting Secretary’s July 28, 2020, Memorandum on DACA
USCIS provided guidance on how it will implement DHS Acting Secretary’s 7/28/20 DACA memo. Among other things, USCIS will reject all initial DACA requests from individuals who have never received DACA and will limit grants of deferred action and employment authorization to no more than one year.
TRAC Reports Immigration Court Completions Remain at Historic Lows Through July 2020
TRAC reports canceled hearings due to COVID-19 have increased delays in immigration court, which has a backlog of 1,233,307 and completed only 5,960 cases in 7/20. Further, between 4/20 and 7/20, DHS issued a total of 111,752 new NTAs, while 347,450 immigrants still await master calendar hearings.
CA3 Says It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review BIA’s Discretionary Denial of Petitioner’s Motion for Certification of Late-Filed Appeal
Concluding that the “settled course exception” did not apply in the context of the case, the court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary decision to decline to self-certify the petitioner’s late-filed appeal. (Abdulla v. Att’y Gen., 8/20/20)
CA8 Affirms Denial of EAJA Attorney’s Fees Where Government’s Position Was Substantially Justified
The court held that the district court did not err in concluding that the government’s litigation position was substantially justified, and thus affirmed the district court’s order denying the petitioner’s attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). (Garcia v. Barr, 8/20/20)
CA11 Says It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review Petitions Except to Extent They Raise Constitutional Claims or Questions of Law
The court held that it is precluded under INA §242(a)(2)(B)(i) from reviewing any judgment regarding the granting of relief under INA §§212(h), 212(i), 240A, 240B, or 245, except to the extent that such review involves constitutional claims or questions of law. (Patel v. Att’y Gen., 8/19/20)