Areas of Expertise

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.

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 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.
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.
Since taking office in January 2025, the Trump administration has aggressively prioritized immigration enforcement and revoked many longstanding protections from prior administrations, including one preventing enforcement action in certain sensitive locations.

Despite the administration’s many attempts to deprive immigrants of their constitutional and legal rights, everyone, regardless of immigration status, has certain constitutional protections and a right to a free public education.

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.
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.
This practice advisory focuses on motions to reopen based on ineffective assistance of prior counsel. It reviews the basic requirements of motions to reopen and then dives into the specific procedural and substantive requirements of motions to reopen based on the ineffective assistance of prior counsel. It discusses the time and numerical limitations on motions to reopen and how to use the doctrine of equitable tolling to overcome these limitations. It also covers what documents should accompany a motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel so that the motion has the best chances of success. Finally, it briefly discusses the option of filing an appeal if the immigration court or the BIA denies the motion to reopen.
The Immigration Legal Resource Center (ILRC) has developed a comprehensive framework to enhance its engagement with directly impacted community members. This framework is designed to systematically involve these individuals in the ILRC’s activities, ensuring that their voices and experiences are central to our work.
The ILRC has published its 2024 Annual Report, which includes information about the initiatives the organization took that year, as well as the organization's financial position.
The ILRC has published its 2024 Annual Report, which includes information about the initiatives the organization took that year, as well as the organization's financial position.