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
AILA’s 2022 Annual Conference: ICE Open Forum
Watch the ICE Open Forum from AILA’s 2022 AILA Annual Conference on Immigration Law.
CA8 Rejects Petitioner’s Due Process Challenge Where She Was Unable to Show That IJ Made a Fundamental Procedural Error
The court rejected the petitioner’s claim that the IJ had violated her due process rights, and thus concluded that the petitioner’s admission of the charges against her and her concession of removability could be admitted at a subsequent hearing. (Holmes v. Garland, 6/17/22)
Key Takeaways: EOIR Open Forum at AILA’s 2022 Annual Conference
AILA provides key takeaways from the 6/17/22 Open Forum panel with EOIR at the 2022 Annual Conference. Special thanks to the AILA EOIR Liaison Committee.
CA7 Holds That Petitioner’s Conviction for Dealing Methamphetamine in Indiana Was Not an Aggravated Felony
Granting the petition for review, the court held that the petitioner’s conviction in Indiana for one count of dealing methamphetamine was not an aggravated felony for purposes of removal because the statute of his conviction was facially overbroad. (Aguirre-Zuniga v. Garland, 6/16/22)
CA9 Holds That BIA May Rely on Certain Previous Adverse Credibility Determinations to Deny Motion to Reopen
The court held that the BIA may rely on a previous adverse credibility determination to deny a motion to reopen if that earlier finding still factually undermines the petitioner’s new argument. (Greenwood v. Garland, 6/16/22)
Ten Years Later – Where are Permanent Protections for DREAMers?
Today, AILA celebrates 10 years since the creation of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative but calls on Congress to pass permanent protections; AILA Executive Director Ben Johnson notes, “Congress’ inaction on this issue is a moral and political failure.”
BIA Found Deferred Adjudication for Felony Battery Was a Particularly Serious Crime
The BIA dismissed the appeal after finding that the Immigration Judge properly concluded that his deferred adjudication for felony battery under Florida law rendered him “convicted by a final judgment of a particularly serious crime”. Matter of D-L-S-, 28 I&N Dec. 568 (BIA 2022)
CA7 Upholds Deferral of Removal Denial to Petitioner Who Feared He Would Be Killed by a Cartel in Mexico
The court held that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s affirmance of the IJ’s adverse credibility determination as to the petitioner, a Mexican national who claimed he would be killed by a cartel in Mexico and that the police would not protect him. (Cabrera-Ruiz v. Garland, 6/14/22)
CA1 Reverses Denial of CAT Claim as to Dominican Petitioner Who Claimed He Had Been Abused by Police Officers
Granting the petition for review, the court found that the BIA had erred in upholding the IJ’s adverse credibility determination as to the Dominican petitioner, because the petitioner’s testimony regarding his abuse was not inconsistent. (Reyes Pujols v. Garland, 6/14/22)
CA9 Rejects Petitioner’s First Amendment and Equal Protection Challenge to INA §212(a)(6)(E)(i)
The court held that INA §212(a)(6)(E)(i), which makes noncitizens removable or ineligible for certain relief due to alien smuggling, is not facially overbroad under the First Amendment, is not unconstitutionally vague, and does not violate equal protection. (Marquez-Reyes v. Garland, 6/14/22)
ICE ERO Releases Updated COVID-19 Pandemic Response Requirements for ICE Detention Facilities
ICE ERO updated its COVID-19 Pandemic Response Requirements (PRR) to outline mandatory requirements, set forth expectations and best practices, and assist detention facility operators in sustaining detention operations during the pandemic. Last updated on 6/13/22.
CA9 Finds BIA Erred in Determining That Petitioner Did Not Suffer Past Persecution in Nicaragua
Granting the petition for review, the court held that the BIA erred in concluding that the petitioner did not suffer past persecution in Nicaragua because the record compelled a finding that his past experiences rose to the level of persecution. (Flores Molina v. Garland, 6/13/22)
Supreme Court Rules That INA §242(f)(1) Deprived District Courts of Jurisdiction to Grant Class-Wide Relief to Detained Respondents
The U.S. Supreme Court held that the ordinary meaning of the terms “enjoin” and “restrain” in INA §242(f)(1) deprived the district courts of jurisdiction to entertain the respondents’ requests for class-wide injunctive relief. (Garland, et al. v. Gonzalez, et al., 6/13/22)
Supreme Court Says Government Is Not Required to Give Detained Noncitizens Bond Hearings Where It Must Show They Are a Flight Risk
The U.S. Supreme Court held that INA §241(a)(6) does not require the government to provide noncitizens detained for six months with bond hearings in which the government bears the burden of proving that they pose a flight risk. (Johnson, et al. v. Arteaga-Martinez, 6/13/22)
CA9 Says Conviction for First-Degree Burglary of a Dwelling in Oregon Is Not a Particularly Serious Crime
The court found that the BIA had misapplied a presumption in determining that the petitioner’s conviction for first-degree burglary of a dwelling in Oregon was a particularly serious crime barring withholding of removal. (Mendoza-Garcia v. Garland, 6/10/22)
CRS Releases Updated Legal Sidebar on the Biden Administration’s Enforcement Priorities
CRS provided an updated legal sidebar on the Biden administration’s immigration directives. The report notes prior immigration enforcement policies, Biden’s immigration enforcement priorities, and current legal considerations.
AILA Submits Comments on the Immigration Court Practice Manual and the BIA Practice Manual
AILA submitted feedback and comments in response to EOIR’s notice for feedback on the Immigration Court Practice Manual and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) Practice Manual and requests more time to respond and consider asking for feedback by chapter or manual in the future.
AILA and Partners File Amicus Brief with CA1 Arguing Insufficient Notice
AILA and partners filed an amicus brief with the First Circuit arguing that a notice to appear that is invalid under Pereira and Niz-Chavez cannot be the basis for an in-absentia order.
CA5 Finds BIA Did Not Err in Denying Petitioner’s Appeal Based on His Removability Under INA §237(a)(2)(A)(iii)
The court held that the petitioner’s order of restitution for $229,717.30—which reflected the amount owed within the judgment for petitioner’s federal wire fraud conspiracy conviction—provided clear and convincing evidence of the losses to the petitioner’s victims. (Fosu v. Garland, 6/7/22)
CA5 Says Petitioner’s Texas State Conviction for Injury to a Child Rendered Him Removable Under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i)
Applying the modified categorical approach, the court held that the petitioner had been charged with, and pleaded guilty to, causing bodily injury to a child, and thus that the BIA did not err in finding him to be removable pursuant to INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i). (Monsonyem v. Garland, 6/7/22)
CA9 Holds That Petitioner’s California Forgery Conviction Was a CIMT
The court upheld the BIA’s denial of cancellation of removal, concluding that the petitioner’s conviction for forgery under California Penal Code (CPC) §472 was a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) that disqualified him from relief. (Vasquez-Borjas v. Garland, 6/6/22)
Civil Rights Groups Reach Settlement with Federal Government in Lawsuit Concerning Illegal Immigration Arrests
Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus and the ACLU Foundation of Northern California reached a settlement agreement with the government to stop ICE from using a third-party contractor to perform civil immigration arrests at jails and prisons. (Solano v. ICE, et al., 7/6/22)
CA11 Concludes There Was No Legal or Constitutional Error in BIA’s Decision Denying Cancellation of Removal
Dismissing the petition for review, the court rejected the petitioner’s arguments that the BIA had erred in disregarding important facts in its hardship determination and had failed to render a reasoned decision after reciting the proper legal standards. (Flores-Alonso v. Att’y Gen., 6/6/22)
Tracking Changes to the EOIR Policy Manual
Use this page to track changes to the EOIR Policy Manual. On June 3, 2022, EOIR revised chapters 7.1 and 7.4 and added chapter 7.6 to update procedures for credible fear screening and consideration of asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection claims by asylum officers.
EOIR Updates Part II of the Policy Manual
EOIR updated chapters 7.1 and 7.4 of the policy manual, and added chapter 7.6 to update procedures for credible fear screening and consideration of asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection claims by asylum officers.