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, co-authored by the Immigrant Justice Network (IJN) and the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC), discusses how mandatory detention impacts individuals. IJN is a network comprised of the ILRC, the Immigrant Defense Project (IDP), and the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild.
This practice alert provides a brief overview of some of the main changes practitioners can expect with the proposed change to fee waiver eligibility and process, most significantly by eliminating receipt of means-tested benefits as a basis for requesting a fee waiver. Given that these significant changes to the fee waiver process will make it more difficult and time-intensive to establish inability to pay an immigration filing fee, we urge practitioners to advise clients who are eligible for a fee waiver based on receipt of means-tested benefits to apply as soon as possible, before this option is eliminated.
This community alert provides key information about upcoming changes to the fee waiver process, which allows some applicants to submit their immigration applications without having to pay the filing fee if they cannot afford it. In the coming months, one of the easiest and most straightforward ways of proving that you qualify for a fee waiver request will be going away. Find out more information about this upcoming change and submit your application now if you might qualify for a fee waiver!
This comment period has closed. Click here respond to the latest notice of proposed fee waiver rule change.
The 287(g) program allows designated local law enforcement officers to enforce civil immigration laws. According to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the 287(g) program led to more than 7,000 deportations in 2018.
Collected pages from a FOIA to ICE that relate to the 287(g) program. Includes documents from all over the country, including 287(g) applications and needs assessments, emails about joining the program, MOAs, and other records.
The 287(g) program allows designated local law enforcement .officers to enforce civil immigration law s According to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the 287(g) program led to more than 7,000 deportations in 2018.
The Trump administration has vowed to increase 287(g) agreements, which deputize state and local law enforcement officers to undertake various duties of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. Indeed, as of the date of this publication, 49 of the 78 total 287(g) agreements were created during this current administration, and the number will likely continue to increase. However, all of the current 287(g) agreements will expire on June 30, 2019, unless they are renewed.
On August 8, 2019 the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) posted a second opportunity for notice and comment on the new USCIS Tip Form to collect information from the public regarding purported immigration fraud.
Understanding Unlawful Presence Under § 212(a)(9)(B) and Unlawful Presence Waivers, I-601 and I-601A
This advisory explains unlawful presence under INA § 212(a)(9)(B) and the differences between the I-601 and I-601A waivers of unlawful presence. It covers who needs a waiver of unlawful presence, what are the requirements for a waiver of unlawful presence, and which waiver process to use depending on the applicant’s circumstances.
This guide is for individuals whose DACA expired after September 5, 2016 and are looking to file a “renewal” application in the coming months. The guide includes annotated forms I-821D, I-765 and I-765ws which form a renewal application packet. If an individual’s DACA expired on or before September 5, 2016 or was DACA terminated, they will need to file an application as a “renewal-initial.” This means that extra documentation will be needed in order for the application to be considered complete. That type of application packet is beyond the scope of this guide.
The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program has faced many threats and experienced significant changes since it began in 2012. This toolkit was created to help inform DACA recipients about their rights as well as how other community members can support DACA recipients during these challenging times.
Approximately 700,000 people are currently registered in the DACA program and have seen significant changes and threats to the program. This webinar will present an overview of the current status of DACA as well as tips on renewals and exploring other immigration options for DACA recipients. The webinar will also provide an update on pending litigation and what it might mean for the future of the program and how DACA recipients can prepare for different outcomes. Finally, presenters will provide an update on legislative efforts and identify opportunities for advocacy.
Over the past four years, working with partner organizations throughout California and nationally, the ILRC has helped advocate and pass a series of reforms at the local and state levels that advance the rights of both citizens and noncitizens and connect the dots between the criminal and immigrant justice movements. This graphic describes some of these campaigns. If you would like support leading similar policy efforts of your own, please feel free to reach out to Rose Cahn, rcahn@ilrc.org.
In Stokeling v. United States, the Supreme Court addressed the definition of a "crime of violence" under the ACCA. This advisory alerts public defenders and immigration advocates to possible immigration challenges caused by Stokeling, and defense strategies.
In spite of the constant attacks on sanctuary policies from the current administration, these policies continue to spread, and continue to win in the courts. More than 120 new sanctuary-type laws have been enacted since January 2017, and at least 20 federal court rulings have found in favor of jurisdictions that limit their assistance or involvement in immigration enforcement.
This report outlines the state of immigration enforcement in Orange County, California by providing a window into the historical and current state of Orange County’s immigration policies, their impact on local residents and the considerations and values that ought to guide a vision for a new Orange County. Specifically, the report offers a first look at data obtained through Public Records Act requests from the Orange County Sheriff’s Department and ICE. It concludes with 20 questions that ought to inform any discussion going forward about immigration policy in the sixth most populous county in the nation.
It has always been important to screen naturalization applicants thoroughly to ensure that they are, in fact, eligible for naturalization, and to assess any potential issues that could cause them to denied or deported. While the laws governing how and when someone is eligible to naturalize and how and when someone is deportable have not changed, the importance of screening applicants has increased in light of the new NTA Memo. This packet is meant to assist practitioners in screening naturalization applicants for any issues that may cause them to be denied and deported. It includes a Red Flag Checklist, an Annotated Red Flag Checklist, a Guide for Legal Reviewers, and a Review Cheat Sheet for Workshops.
In July 2018, USCIS issued a new policy memorandum that limits the circumstances in which it will issue Requests for Evidence (RFE) and Notices of Intent to Deny (NOID). This practice advisory provides an overview of the law governing RFEs and NOIDs, outlines the changes to USCIS policy announced in the July 2018 policy memo, and sets forth a six-step process to follow when responding to requests for additional evidence. The advisory also includes sample arguments to make when responding to common RFE and NOID scenarios in the SIJS context.
This advisory gives an orientation to the deportation process for community members and new advocates. It breaks down the process into four steps that typically happen in an immigrant’s experience with the deportation system, providing a basic overview of ICE enforcement, the court system, and the effect of a removal or deportation order.
In the past, denaturalization proceedings were rare and usually brought only against alleged war criminals and in other extreme cases. However, continuing their assault on immigrants, families, and communities of color, the Trump administration has increased resources dedicated to pursuing denaturalization in an effort to strip citizenship from naturalized citizens and there are concerns this number will continue to grow. This practice advisory will briefly describe these recent efforts to increase denaturalizations, the legal grounds and process for denaturalizing a citizen, and the consequences of denaturalization.
Noncitizens who are seeking to obtain Lawful Permanent Residence via family members can do so using two processes—consular processing at a United States consulate or embassy in the person’s home country, or through adjustment of status at a United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) office in the United States. For those already in the United States, adjustment of status is preferable because they do not have to worry about traveling abroad, triggering the unlawful presence inadmissibility grounds that are triggered by a departure, separating from their family, and are able to benefit from an appeal or review process not available to consular processing cases. Often individuals present in the United States who have a family member who can submit a family-based petition for them, are prevented from adjusting status because of the manner they entered.
The Child Status Protection Act (CSPA) was devised to protect intending immigrant children from “aging-out” while undergoing the lengthy process to status. This advisory discusses how CSPA protects children of U.S. citizens in their applications for permanent residency. This is one of three advisories in a series detailing the benefits and limitations of the CSPA in the immigration process. For more information on the CSPA, see our advisories, “The CSPA and Children of Permanent Residents” and “The CSPA and Asylees.”
The master calendar hearing is the first hearing in removal proceedings before an immigration judge of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, during which serious substantive decisions can be made in an immigrant’s removal case. Advocates must be well prepared and have a clear case strategy in mind prior to the master calendar hearing, as well as a detailed plan for how to advocate during this hearing. This advisory and accompanying checklist are designed to provide a quick guide for advocates to flag the issues that need to be addressed when representing clients at a master calendar hearing.
USCIS's Policy Memorandum of June 28, 2018, provides new guidance for when USCIS will issue a Notice to Appear (NTA) to applicants requesting immigration benefits. This practice advisory outlines the NTA Memo’s impact on naturalization cases. Specifically, this advisory discusses the NTA Memo’s particular directives for naturalization cases; provides the legal context for when a naturalization applicant can be placed in removal proceedings; discusses best practices for preparing a naturalization application under the new NTA Memo; and offers practice tips if your naturalization client is placed in removal proceedings.