The Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC) immigration attorneys’ expertise focuses on family-based immigration, humanitarian relief, naturalization and citizenship, immigration enforcement, and removal defense.
Since 1979 we have helped expand the immigration expertise of attorneys, nonprofit staff, criminal defenders, and others assisting immigrant clients.
In addition to authoring the ILRC’s practice manuals, our expert attorneys have been published by Continuing Education of the Bar (CEB), American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), ILW.com, Huffington Post, Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law, Center for Law and Social Policy, The Hill, LexisNexis Emerging Issues, and Fox News Latino.
We have also provided training to National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), American Bar Association Commission on Immigration, Federal Bar Association, The State Bar of California, Legal Aid Association of California, Judicial Council of California and more.
The Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC) opposes the general elimination of money order and check payments for immigration benefit filings. This change was introduced by a USCIS alert on changes to the USCIS Policy Manual on August 29, 2025, to be effective as of October 28, 2025. The new guidance states that all applications filed October 28, 2025, or after must pay by ACH bank account payment, credit or debit card, or pre-paid card. No bank checks, certified checks, personal checks or money orders will be accepted thereafter.
On September 30, 2025, ILRC submitted this comment to USCIS to oppose the proposed changes to the N-648 and request that they be withdrawn. The changes create a series of substantial obstacles for naturalization applicants applying for a disability waiver of the English/civics requirement. The proposed changes create a form more than twice the length (10 pp.) of the current form (just over 4 pp.) that creates an undue burden on applicants and the medical professional who must complete the N-648. It also doubles the burden of time for USCIS adjudicators who must review this form.
The barrier that these changes would pose is prejudicial to eligible waiver applicants. Standards expressed in the revised form are outside any guidance provided by the statute, regulations and USCIS Policy Manual. The form purports to create law and invents barriers to eligibility in areas where no such law has been established by legitimate guidance.
The barrier that these changes would pose is prejudicial to eligible waiver applicants. Standards expressed in the revised form are outside any guidance provided by the statute, regulations and USCIS Policy Manual. The form purports to create law and invents barriers to eligibility in areas where no such law has been established by legitimate guidance.
This practice advisory provides information about recently implemented fee increases at USCIS and EOIR. These fee increases are a result of the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” also known as HR1. This advisory explores what we know and what we still don’t know about the fees, how to pay them, and potential future changes.
On April 15, 2025, the ILRC filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for USCIS records regarding the SIJS Deferred Action Policy. When the government failed to respond in a timely manner, we filed suit. This resource includes all documents we have received from USCIS as a result of the FOIA request, as well as a short summary of the request and results.
This practice alert covers recent U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) policy statements announced in August 2025 that could affect naturalization applicants.
On July 28, 2025, the ILRC submitted a comment opposing a new government rule that imposes massive civil fines—sometimes up to nearly $2 million—on immigrants who entered the U.S. without authorization or did not leave after a removal order.
On July 28, 2025, the ILRC submitted a comment opposing a new government proposal to add extra questions to nine immigration forms, including applications for naturalization, asylum, and green cards.
On July 24, 2025, the ILRC submitted a comment strongly opposing the government’s proposed changes to Form G-325A and related policies that end protections for three vulnerable groups: young people with Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS), stateless individuals, and immigrant workers in the Deferred Action for Labor Enforcement (DALE) program.
The ILRC strongly opposes new U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) policy changes that end deferred action for youth approved for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS).
On July 16, 2025, ILRC submitted a comment opposing a new U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) policy that allows the agency to use “derogatory information” against immigration applicants without always disclosing it.
On July 7, 2025, the ILRC submitted a comment opposing a new federal rule that changes how the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) handles unaccompanied children.
On May 2, 2025 the ILRC submitted a letter signed by 115 organizations has opposing a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) proposed rule to expand the information collected on immigration forms.
On May 2, 2025 the ILRC submitted a comment opposing a proposed U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) rule that would expand the collection of personal information from immigration applicants.
On May 5, 2025 the ILRC submitted a comment opposing a proposed U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) rule that would require immigrants to disclose their social media identifiers on application forms.
For many noncitizens, naturalization is the best defense against deportation from the United States. Indeed, USCIS lacks the authority to detain or deport a U.S. citizen. However, applying for naturalization can be risky for some individuals because it can instigate immigration enforcement. This concern has increased following President Trump’s February 28, 2025 NTA Memo. The ILRC, NIPNLG, CLINIC, and the Ready to Stay collaborative wrote a practice advisory summarizing the most common reasons why USCIS may deny an N-400, providing guidance for ways to screen and avoid an N-400 denial and removal proceedings, and discussing immigration relief options in immigration court.
This practice advisory provides background on the disability waiver of the English and civics requirement for naturalization and describes the June 2025 revisions to the USCIS Policy Manual (PM) on the submission and review of disability waivers. The revised guidance in the PM applies to applications filed on or after the publication date of June 13, 2025. Overall, the PM revisions signal a change in tone that assumes fraud in the disability waiver process is frequent and encourages increased scrutiny by USCIS adjudicators.
Recently, the Department of Justice (DOJ) published a memo listing out its priorities for civil enforcement cases. In that memo, the DOJ states that it will be focusing on denaturalization cases. This memo - along with statements made by administration officials and members of congress - has sparked a lot of attention on denaturalization and questions about who could be denaturalized. This has caused a lot of fear and uncertainty in communities, but denaturalization is not as straightforward as you might think.
Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) authorized the creation of a program that allows state and local law enforcement agencies to act as immigration enforcement agents.This policy brief reviews the recent history of 287(g) agreements and how they’ve proliferated, describes the three 287(g) agreement models, examines a case study of escalating 287(g) programs in Florida, delves into the programs’ dangers and harms, and provides some recommendations for local communities that want to stop 287(g) agreements in their tracks.
A resource highlighting interior enforcement practices within the Harris county region of Houston, Texas.
In this Resource Toolkit, we will address recent changes affecting students and school campuses and what students, parents and caregivers, and school administrators can do to prepare for immigration enforcement action at schools while highlighting the constitutional protections that remain a pillar of our democracy.
Community members across the country are reporting visits from immigration and other federal officers seeking to meet with certain children who entered the United States unaccompanied. These children are often referred to as “unaccompanied children” (UCs) because at the time they were arrested by immigration (such as crossing the border), they were not with a parent or legal guardian. Although these visits are sometimes described as “wellness checks,” they are part of a broader, coordinated effort to locate and deport some vulnerable young people and their sponsors. It is crucial for families and immigrant communities to stay informed, exercise their rights, and seek legal support when needed.
ILRC submitted a comment to USCIS in response to the revisions published on June 13, 2025 to guidance for disability waivers of the English and civics requirement for naturalization. ILRC opposed the 2025 revisions as they rely on a false narrative that fraud is rampant in the disability waiver process.
In recent months, the Department of Homeland Security has begun filing thousands of motions to recalendar administratively closed proceedings. This trend is raising questions about how attorneys and accredited representatives can respond to these motions and protect their clients’ interests, particularly in cases that have been administratively closed for many years. This advisory explores those questions and offers strategy considerations when determining how to proceed in each case.
This tool offers a template that practitioners can use to help identify possible asylum eligibility. The screening questions are intended to elicit information about the basis of an asylum claim, identify possible bars and challenges, and flag areas where further follow-up may be needed. Accompanying the screening tool are some notes to help guide practitioners in assessing relief and spotting potential issues.