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.
This resource takes a brief look at the history of the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), how it was coopted by the Trump Administration and used as part of the larger enforcement mechanism in the U.S. We will look at the impact of adding ICE administrative warrants into NCIC, why the Houston Police Department’s entanglement goes beyond what state law requires and how this policy betrays Houstonians.
On August, 24, 2026, the ILRC submitted a comment opposing a proposed rule entitled Naturalization Application Fee Adjustments. The rule seeks to raise the application fee for Form N-400 by 75-80% as well as eliminates the fee waiver and fee reduction for naturalization applications. ILRC opposes this rule given that it will create a substantial barrier for low-income naturalization applicants who could be permanently priced out of citizenship.
On September 28, 2026, the ILRC submitted a comment in opposition of an interim final rule (IFR) entitled Affirmative Asylum Referrals without Interview. This rule will deprive many asylum seekers of their ability to fully present their cases at the asylum office and instead, push them into the immigration court backlog where they face and adversarial system and ever-growing due process violations. ILRC also opposes the issuance of this rule without the notice and comment period required by the Administrative Procedures Act.
On September 22, 2026, the ILRC submitted a comment opposing a proposed USCIS rule to increase the filing for for H-1B Visa petitions. The proposed rule set a filing fee of over $100,000 and also proposed to use the USCIS filing fees for other agencies.
This practice advisory summarizes this case and the issues that remain live in the Fifth Circuit, and offers advice on how to advocate for admin closure and termination in the current climate.
These four step-by-step guides will walk you through the steps for filing your first petition for habeas corpus (immigration) in each of the California federal district courts--the Eastern District of California, the Northern District of California, the Central District of California, and the Southern District of California.
This chart describes commonly applied conduct-based grounds of inadmissibility and deportability and the juvenile court dispositions that might provide the government with evidence that the person comes within the ground.
The Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC) submitted a comment to USCIS opposing proposed changes to Form I-130, which would more than double the form’s length and require additional information from petitioners and beneficiaries, including expanded criminal history, employment, education, and family-history questions.
The ILRC has published its 2025 Annual Report, which includes information about the initiatives the organization took that year, as well as the organization's financial position.
This step-by-step guide will walk you through the steps for filing your first petition for habeas corpus (immigration) in the Southern District of California. The guide provides helpful tips and how-tos from registering for PACER, the federal court electronic filing system, to applying for admission to the district bar, to formatting and filing your petition and motion for injunctive relief. The guide includes helpful screenshots and references to the local rules, as well as links to other useful practice advisories and resources.
In this community explainer, we will discuss the effects of this decision, how it impacts advance parole travel and applications for adjustment of status, and what applicants must consider moving forward.
This practice advisory reviews recent changes and current practice in filing FOIA requests with DHS and with the different offices within DHS. Since January 22, 2026, all have transitioned exclusively to online filing. The only exception is for persons who lack internet access, such as incarcerated requestors, who may still file on paper, by mail.
On August 13, 2026, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) issued a decision on Matter of Delcarmen-Lara, that overruled Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly and held that travel on advance parole is now a "departure" for purposes of the unlawful presence bars at INA § 212(a)(9)(B)(i).
The Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC) submitted a comment strongly opposing the Department of Homeland Security’s Final Rule on “[Immigrant] Registration Form and Evidence of Registration.” The rule expands and formalizes a registration process that could expose millions of immigrants—and potentially U.S. citizens—to increased fear, confusion, racial profiling, and immigration enforcement.
The 287(g) program authorizes local law enforcement to make an agreement with DHS to conduct certain immigration enforcement activities. Without 287(g), local police and sheriffs generally do not have any authority to enforce immigration laws. The Memorandum of Agreement for 287(g) describes how the program will work and what powers are delegated to the local agency. We have annotated these MOAs to explain what the agreements include and how the program works.
On July 28, 2026, the Ninth Circuit ruled that Cal. Pen. Code § 273.5 is not a crime of violence. This practice advisory discusses the reasoning of the decision and provides advice on next steps for removal defense practitioners and criminal defenders representing noncitizens.
The Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC) submitted a comment urging DHS to withdraw its proposed rule that would dramatically restrict access to employment authorization for many immigrants.
On April 8, 2026, the ILRC submitted a comment in response to a proposed federal immigration rule that would sharply limit appeals to the Board of Immigration Appeals, arguing that it would weaken due process protections for people facing removal.
This new policy platform examines how the 1996 laws expanded detention, deportation, and family separation – and outlines a vision for a more just and humane future.
In this community explainer we will address some frequently asked questions on what this change means and who and when it applies.
This step-by-step guide will walk you through the steps for filing your first petition for habeas corpus (immigration) in the Central District of California.
This analysis could be particularly helpful for clients from countries that previously did not accept individuals deported from the U.S., such as Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam, as well as those from former Soviet countries.
This advisory summarizes the majority and dissent’s opinions, and shares key takeaways and practice tips for criminal defenders and immigration practitioners in light of the decision.
The comment explains that denying applications after they have already been accepted can result in the loss of filing fees, lengthy delays, and even permanent loss of immigration benefits when eligibility depends on the original filing date.