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
CA7 Upholds Asylum Denial to Petitioner Who Allegedly Faced Persecution in Kyrgystan for Protesting Government Mining Rights Deal
Although it shared some of petitioner’s concerns about the IJ’s review of corroborating evidence, the court held that petitioner’s account of events that led him to flee Kyrgyzstan contained too many inconsistencies to overturn the IJ’s adverse credibility finding. (Uulu v. Garland, 9/1/23)
CA8 Finds Petitioner with Emotional and Mental Health Issues Failed to Show Exceptional and Extremely Unusual Hardship
Upholding the denial of the motion to reopen following the denial of cancellation, the court found that the BIA rationally determined that petitioner’s evidence of emotional and mental health issues failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship. (Trejo-Gamez v. Garland, 8/30/23)
CA2 Says IJs Must Consider Ramsameachire Factors in Assessing Credibility During Border Interviews
The court held that an IJ may not rely on a border interview to find an asylum applicant not credible without first considering the factors set forth in Ramsameachire v. Ashcroft, if the record indicates that those factors may be relevant. (Pomavilla-Zaruma v. Garland, 8/30/23)
Find a Unicorn, Slay a Dragon: The Categorical Approach, Circa 2023
Michael Vastine describes how he has deployed the “‘categorical approach' challenging many settled notions about what crimes should have immigration consequences“ and previews the upcoming Fall Conference track where “experts will summarize the dominant lines of cases from each Court of Appeal
CA8 Upholds CAT Denial to Former Child Solider Who Claimed He Would Be Tortured in South Sudan Due to His Mental Illness
Upholding the denial of Convention Against Torture (CAT) relief, the court held that the BIA did not err in finding that petitioner, a former child solder, had not shown it was more likely than not that the South Sudanese government would torture him upon return. (Deng v. Garland, 8/25/23)
CA7 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Petitioner Who Alleged She Was a Victim of Domestic Abuse
The court found that substantial evidence supported the IJ’s and BIA’s denial of asylum as to the petitioner, who had fled with her daughters from Guatemala where they were allegedly victims of domestic abuse. (Munoz-Rivera, et al. v. Garland, 8/24/23)
CA9 Holds That Appointment and Removal Process for IJs and BIA Members Comports with Article II of the Constitution
Denying the petition for review, the court held that the appointment and removal process for IJs and members of the BIA comports with Article II of the U.S. Constitution. (Duenas v. Garland, 7/27/23, amended 8/24/23)
Recent Child Labor Violations Highlight Need for Critical Labor Reforms
In this blog post, AILA member Shelly Anand and co-author Audrey Moor describe how and why current labor laws fail to protect child workers and urge immigrant rights' advocates and labor law reform advocates to work together to pass legislative reforms that will ensure clear and lasting protections.
CA1 Holds That BIA and IJ Applied Incorrect Legal Standard in Assessing Ecuadorian Petitioner’s CAT Claim
The court held that, in analyzing petitioner’s Convention Against Torture (CAT) claim, the BIA and the IJ applied the incorrect legal standard in assessing whether the Ecuadorian government would more likely than not consent or acquiesce in his torture. (Murillo Morocho v. Garland, 8/21/23)
CA1 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Petitioner Who Allegedly Fled Gangs and Extortion in El Salvador
The court held that substantial evidence supported the IJ’s and BIA’s findings that the petitioner’s experiences in El Salvador fell below the level of harm necessary to establish past persecution. (Montoya-Lopez v. Garland, 8/21/23)
CA8 Upholds BIA’s Finding of Removability as to Petitioner Convicted of Aggravated Identity Theft
The court affirmed the BIA’s finding of removability as to the petitioner, who had been convicted of Aggravated Identity Theft predicated on Wire Fraud for participating in an identity theft scheme that defrauded the State of California of roughly $475,000. (Robbertse v. Garland, 8/21/23)
CA10 Upholds Denial of Motion to Terminate After Finding Alleged Fourth Amendment Violations Were Not Egregious
The court held that the BIA did not err in concluding that the petitioner, who was detained in state custody and later transferred to ICE, had not shown that purported violations of the Fourth Amendment, the INA, and agency regulations were sufficiently egregious. (Aguayo v. Garland, 8/18/23)
CA6 Upholds Denial of Withholding and CAT Claims Based on Bulgarian Petitioner’s Failure to Present Credible Claim for Relief
The court upheld the BIA’s and IJ’s denial of withholding of removal and Convention Against Torture (CAT) protection based on the finding that the petitioner’s omissions in his testimony were substantially related to his claims and rendered him not credible. (Kolov v. Garland, 8/18/23)
Featured Issue: Immigration Court Backlog and Reprioritization
The immigration courts require urgent attention to address the 1.3 million case backlog. AILA provides a featured issue page with resources explaining how DOJ and EOIR can reprioritize cases on the docket by removing nonpriority matters.
CA8 Holds That Completed Hobbs Act Robbery Is a Crime of Violence Under INA §101(a)(43)(F)
The court held that the petitioner, who had pleaded guilty to one count of Hobbs Act robbery and had spent five years in prison, was removable because a completed Hobbs Act robbery is a crime of violence under INA §101(a)(43)(F). (Green v. Garland, 8/16/23)
AILA and Northwest Immigrant Rights Project Submit Amicus Brief to EOIR on Mandatory Detention
AILA and Northwest Immigrant Rights Project submitted an amicus brief to EOIR arguing that INA § 236 governs Matter of Perez Cruz and that the IJ decision should be vacated.
NWRIP and AILA Address Bond Eligibility for Respondent Deemed Subject to Mandatory Detention
AILA’s Amicus Committee joined NWRIP in submitting a brief arguing that the respondent was entitled to a custody redetermination by the IJ as he was subject to detention under INA §236(a) and not INA §235(b)(2).
EOIR to Stop Holding Hearings in Boise on S. Vinnell Street
EOIR announced that it will no longer hold hearings in Boise, Idaho, effective at the closure of business on August 31, 2023. All Idaho and Montana cases will also be transferred from Salt Lake City to Portland, Oregon beginning September 1, 2023.
ICE Issues Directive on INTERPOL Red Notices and Wanted Person Diffusions
ICE issued ICE Directive 15006.1 to provide guidance to ICE personnel about Red Notices or Wanted Person Diffusions, stating that ICE will not rely exclusively on Red Notices or Wanted Person Diffusions to justify enforcement actions or during immigration proceedings. Guidance is effective 9/30/23.
EOIR Announces New Appellate Immigration Judge
EOIR announced the appointment of Katharine E. Clark as a Board Member of EOIR’s Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). Announcement includes biographical information on Katharine.
BIA Rules on Determining If Official’s Tortuous Conduct Was Undertaken “In an Official Capacity” for Purposes of CAT Eligibility
The BIA held that, for purposes of Convention Against Torture (CAT) eligibility, an official’s torturous conduct was undertaken “in an official capacity” if they were able to engage in the conduct because of their government position. Matter of J-G-R-, 28 I&N Dec. 733 (BIA 2023)
CA9 Says Petitioner Was Not Required to Include New Application for Relief with Motion to Reopen Based on Changed Circumstances
The court held that, consistent with the plain text of 8 CFR §1003.2(c)(1) and various persuasive authorities, a motion to reopen that adds new circumstances to a previously considered application need not be accompanied by an application for relief. (Reyes-Corado v. Garland, 8/11/23)
EOIR Announces 38 New Immigration Judges
EOIR announced the appointment of 38 immigration judges to immigration courts in California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, Texas, Utah, and Virginia.
DOJ 60-Day Notice and Request for Comment on Proposed Revisions to Form EOIR-27
DOJ 60-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 10/10/23. (88 FR 53927, 8/9/23)
CA9 Remands Where BIA Applied Wrong Standard in Denying Petitioner’s Motion to Reopen
The court held that prima facie eligibility for cancellation of removal requires only a threshold showing of eligibility—that is, a reasonable likelihood that the petitioner would prevail on the merits if the motion to reopen were granted. (Fonseca-Fonseca v. Garland, 8/8/23)