Areas of Expertise

2020 has proven to be one of the most tumultuous years in recent history. We have struggled to survive a deadly global pandemic and faced a national reckoning on racial inequity and police brutality. Over the past four years, immigration enforcement tactics have continued to instill fear, and any protection policies have been decimated. Immigrant communities face the constant threat of deportation and essential immigrant workers, such as farmworkers, face inhumane and exploitative working conditions. As we think about immigration policy in the days and months ahead, we must reject the notion that certain community members can be treated as disposable. Our immigration policies must be guided by values that uphold the dignity of all immigrants and bring us closer to becoming the country we promise to be. 

In January 2020, the Committee for Review of the Penal Code began convening with the intent of putting forward wide ranging recommendations for reforms to the California criminal legal code. Understanding the significant impact of the process for California’s immigrant population, the ILRC has formally submitted recommendations, advice, and expert testimony as the committee engages in its deliberations. We will continue to update this site with our recommendations to the committee.

Across the country, states and localities are increasingly moving to end marijuana prohibition laws. For immigrant communities, despite the changing attitude toward marijuana-related conduct at the state level, an old conviction can still form the basis for immigration-related consequences at the federal level. Though federal legal reforms may be the only way to completely eradicate the immigration consequences of marijuana-related conduct and convictions, reforms at the state level can nevertheless help stop the arrest-to-deportation pipeline. Drawing from our experience with state and municipal efforts across the country, this resource, jointly produced by the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, the Immigrant Defense Project, and the Drug Policy Alliance, lists best practices for municipalities and states looking to decriminalize in a way that lessens the immigration-related harms of marijuana criminalization.

A FOIA request can be an invaluable tool in immigration law to help an immigrant and their representative gain a complete understanding of one’s immigration history. This guide details how to complete a FOIA request for USCIS, ICE, OBIM, and CBP. It provides step-by-step instructions on how to complete Form G-639 and also  includes tips about alternatives to Form G-639, such as online submission options.

California is in the midst of an historic reform of its Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). Under current plans, failed DJJ facilities will close, creating an opportunity for youth to be cared for close to home through community-based programs and services. But if DJJ closes, it must close justly. Any closure must divest from carceral solutions and invest in restorative and transformative justice rooted in community wellness and safety. Any closure must take into account the needs of all impacted communities, including immigrant youth. This resource highlights the two main ways that noncitizen youth may be impacted by the DJJ closure and makes recommendations to ensure that DJJ closes justly for all.

This brief advisory written by Rose Cahn, ILRC and Anoop Prasad, Asian Americans Advancing Justice Asian Law Caucus, discusses how petitions for relief using PC 1437, the reform to the felony murder rule, can be helpful to immigrants seeking to mitigate immigration consequences.

A one-page issue spotting decision tree to help screen for potential forms of post-conviction relief.  For an in-depth discussion of any of these vehicles, see this guide, created by the ILRC and Californians for Safety and Justice.

This resource provides helpful charts of the grounds of inadmissibility as applied to special immigrant juveniles (SIJs). It also describes the waiver standard and process for SIJs.

On July 30, 2020, Attorney General Barr issued Matter of Reyes, 28 I&N Dec. 52 (A.G. 2020), a case involving a longtime lawful permanent resident with a single conviction for violating a larceny statute that criminalizes both theft and fraud, and is indivisible as between these means of commission. She had been sentenced to over one year in prison and there was an established loss amount of greater than $10,000. This practice alert provides a summary of the decision and potential practice tips for both immigration practitioners and criminal defense attorneys representing noncitizens in criminal and immigration cases. These tips focus on challenging the correctness of the AG's new theory of removability, challenging any judicial deference to the AG's opinion, fighting DHS efforts to file new NTAs or motions to reopen past proceedings, contesting retroactive application of the new decision, and criminal defense strategies for avoiding its reach in advising noncitizens on resolving open criminal matters.  

On July 28, 2020 the Department of Homeland Security issued a memorandum severely restricting the DACA program. Despite a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision fully reinstating the program, the Trump administration has issued another attack on the program. This community alert gives a brief summary of memorandum and the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Implementing Guidance issued on August 21, 2020 and what it means for community members.

On August 13, 2020, ILRC submitted comments on recent changes to USCIS’s policy manual. The new chapters on discretion will radically alter adjudications of  a wide variety of applications for immigration benefits. We recommend that the changes be stricken because they are ultra vires, lack legal support, and will exacerbate USCIS’s current crisis. The policy manual changes compound agency inefficiency, waste, and mismanagement at a time when the agency has crisis-level backlogs and is seeking a bailout from Congress. Instead of looking for ways to streamline adjudications, the policy manual imposes a secondary adjudication process on dozens of application types that will require adjudicators to multiply the amount of time that they spend determining eligibility, a move that will  grind adjudications to an even slower pace  and deny applicants relief for which they would otherwise be eligible.

In October 2019, Attorney General Barr issued Matter of Thomas & Matter of Thompson, altering the standard for when immigration law will recognize a criminal sentencing modification. Since then, government attorneys from ICE and adjudicators from DHS and DOJ have misused and exploited the decision to incorrectly impose immigration consequences on vacated and modified past convictions and sentences. Immigrant rights advocates have pushed back by attacking this decision in the federal courts. In this amicus brief submitted to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, immigration law experts directly challenge the AG's decision, arguing it is incorrect as a matter of law, is not entitled to any level of deference, and if permitted to stand cannot be applied retroactively. These arguments build on a growing body of case law refusing to offer deference to the DOJ on interpretation of immigration provisions that have both civil and criminal application. E.g., Valenzuela Gallardo v. Barr, --- F.3d ---, 2020 WL 4519085 (9th Cir. Aug. 6, 2020). Advocates challenging Thomas/Thompson in agency and court proceedings can use the arguments in this brief to attack the case on the merits and to resist its retroactive application.

This toolkit is designed for legal service organizations who want to engage pro bono attorneys in providing immigrant post-conviction relief screening and services. It contains tools to run a legal clinic to screen for crim/imm issues and post-conviction relief options, tools to perform case-specific legal analysis for noncitizens with prior convictions, and tools to place and supervise post-conviction relief motions with pro bono attorneys. Although this toolkit was designed with pro bono engagement in mind, many tools may also be useful to organizations expanding their own immigrant post-conviction relief practice. 

This toolkit will help reentry service providers expand services for noncitizens impacted by the criminal legal system. It offers an escalating service menu, starting with tools to provide general information about how a conviction can impact immigration status, advancing to tools to help clients gather information necessary for an individualized legal analysis, tools to perform that analysis, and last, tools to pursue immigration-related post-conviction relief. This toolkit was designed with reentry providers in mind, but may also be useful for immigration legal providers serving clients with prior records.

Alert: On September 29, 2020 the Fee Rule was enjoined nation-wide in its entirety by a District court in the Northern District of California, ILRC et al. v. Chad F. Wolf, et al. (ND California) (Case 4:20-cv-05883-JSW) (Sept. 29, 2020).   

Throughout the Trump Administration, the federal government has sought to undermine sanctuary policies by requiring that cities help ICE with immigration enforcement in order to receive certain federal grants from the DOJ. These policies have spurred a dozen lawsuits, almost all of which have ruled in favor of the cities challenging DOJ’s conditions. In 2021, the Biden administration removed all current and prior immigration conditions on federal grants. This advisory explains more about the grant programs affected, the litigation, and what localities should know and do in the current environment.

On November 15, 2019, the ILRC and Public Counsel submitted comments in response to the re-opened comment period on the proposed SIJS regulations, originally published in 2011. The ILRC and Public Counsel each submitted comments on the proposed rule during the original 2011 comment period, organizationally and as part of the Immigrant Children Lawyers Network. Accordingly, in 2019, we wrote to renew our 2011 comments and briefly supplement them due, in part, to concerns and changes in practice that had arisen in the intervening eight years.

This timeline provides a quick, visual summary of the changes to public charge policy at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of State (DOS) from January 2018 through July 29, 2021.

This practice advisory will update applicants on the changes in interpretation of LRIF since its inception. We also discuss the administrative guidance, advocacy efforts, and hurdles to the application process to date.

In light of the continued failure of the U.S. Congress to pass meaningful immigration reform and the continued dysfunction of our immigration system, President Obama announced a series of immigration policy changes though executive action during his presidency. This manual discusses the law, policy, and practice regarding the parts of President Obama’s executive action that have been implemented as of the time of this writing. These new changes, even if short-lived, can help many. They can provide individuals with much-needed immigration relief, and also provide a blueprint for future immigration policy and legislation. Many programs mentioned in this manual, such as parole, DACA, and the enforcement priorities, are in flux, particularly after the 2016 election. We therefore invite you to visit the Immigrant Legal Resource Center’s website at www.ilrc.org for updates and to join our education listserv by subscribing at www.ilrc.org/subscribe to receive email messages about updates to this manual as well as in-person and webinar trainings opportunities related to immigration executive actions.

For an immigrant survivor of crime to qualify for U nonimmigrant status, they must obtain and submit to USCIS a certification of their helpfulness to law enforcement. A law enforcement agency (LEA) or other certifier must complete Form I-918, Supplement B, “U Nonimmigrant Status Certification,” attesting to the survivor’s assistance. In July 2019, the Department of Homeland Security issued an updated guide explaining the U visa requirements and the U visa certification process and identifying best practices for certifying agencies and officials. The new guide is more anti-immigrant in tone than former guidance, but parts of it can still be a useful tool for immigrant advocates. This practice advisory describes the 2019 and previous guidance to certifiers on U visa certification, analyzes the changes in the recently issued guidance, and provides advocacy tips for practitioners involved in the U certification process who wish to utilize the guidance to encourage certifications.

This video details how to complete a DACA renewal application packet by walking through the various forms’ questions to highlight what they mean and focus on areas worth paying close attention to. As always, we highly encourage applicants to seek a consultation with a trusted legal service provider before submitting their packets. Namely this is so applicants can ensure they are submitting their information as accurately as possible and addressing the dimensions of their specific case that may or may not allow them to be eligible for other forms of immigration relief. In this one-hour walkthrough video, the ILRC’s Legal Outreach Coordinator, Abraham Bedoy, dives deep into each form required for a renewal so those taking on their own application packet (forms: I-821D, I-765, I-765WS, G-1145) can follow along to double-check their entries. 

USCIS Naturalization processing was already delayed as long as 3-4 years in many jurisdictions before the pandemic and ensuing USCIS closures hit. Many thousands of applicants are waiting to complete the application process.

Before pushing for change at the city level, it is important to understand your city government’s structure, as well as the responsibilities and powers of elected and appointed city officials, such as the Mayor, City Council, Police Chief, City Attorney and City Manager. This resource is for Texas advocates and explains the differences between the two major forms of city government in Texas, the powers of important city officials, and how various forms of city government affect the roles of those officials.