Results

Despite the real risk of Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) visiting someone’s home, below is the primary pathway in which most vulnerable immigrants will find the highest risk of deportation. This infographic maps out the United States’ arrest-to-deportation pipeline and offers a glimpse of the multiple ways immigrants can be pushed into removal proceedings, from initial contact with law enforcement to immigration detention. Because there are regional differences in local law enforcement policies, variances in which cities participate in federal immigration enforcement programs, and new state-specific laws that serve the deportation machine, this infographic is NOT exhaustive.

ICE’s form for requesting advance notice when someone will be released from custody. ICE uses this when they lack probable cause to issue a detainer, but want the jail to transfer the person to ICE custody anyway.

This resource compares immigration enforcement in Texas before Trump’s inauguration on January 20, 2025 with the policies Trump has instituted since he has taken office. Our analysis shows that Governor Abbott’s immigration enforcement policies led the way for Trump’s actions. Texas has served as experimentation grounds for hateful and sweeping immigration enforcement policies which were quickly adopted by Trump 2.0 for the national level and have also infected other states who have enacted Texas copycat laws and policies. Our analysis below is a mere snapshot of the Texas and federal immigration enforcement policies that are currently in place.

Tracking all the tactics this administration is deploying to target immigrants is overwhelming. In this document, we attempt to summarize some of the key ways the Trump administration is shifting policies and practices to surveil, arrest, detain, deport, and silence immigrants and the people who support them. We do not name every shift; rather, we focus on the weaponization of the criminal legal system, the increasingly authoritarian approach, and the role of the federal budget, which are key tools of the Trump administration’s brutality and also vital sites of advocacy needed to stem the tide.

The IJ roundtable, composed of 71 former Immigration Judges and former Board Members and Appellate Immigration Judges of the Board of Immigration Appeals issued a letter highlighting their concerns about HB 1554 and the importance of having legal counsel in immigration proceedings.

A primer on how ICE uses administrative subpoenas to circumvent local sanctuary laws, from the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law and ILRC. This brief explainer discusses the nature of ICE subpoenas, how they are used, and the legal issues involved.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is proposing to change several forms by adding questions about an applicants’ family members, old email addresses and phone numbers and social media account information. The collection of information goes far beyond what the government needs to adjudicate these applications. The information in this resource discusses what the changes are and how to submit a comment.

The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 confers initial jurisdiction over asylum claims filed by unaccompanied children (UCs) to the asylum office. The Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision in Matter of M-A-C-O-, along with policy changes implemented during the first Trump administration, sought to strip away this crucial protection from many child asylum seekers. Because of these changes and legal challenges by immigrant youth advocates, the current landscape of initial UC asylum jurisdiction has changed. This practice advisory provides an overview of the current state of UC asylum jurisdiction following the Matter of M-A-C-O- decision and the outcome of the JOP v. DHS litigation. It also offers some arguments and practical tips to help practitioners advocate for their UC clients to receive the statutory protections afforded by the TVPRA, as well as the benefits from the JOP v. DHS litigation.

Permanent residents have many rights and benefits.

Permission to live and work in the United States
Eligibility for certain public benefits
Right to travel within the United States and abroad

Your green card is proof of your status. If you lose it or it expires, you are still a permanent resident. Permanent Residence is a status—only an immigration judge can take away your permanent residence. Permanent residents should carry their green card (or at a minimum a copy of it).

Many people who were granted parole to enter the United States, or received a parole document at or after entry, are receiving notices saying that their parole status, and any work permit related to it, is being terminated.
 
While the notice says you should depart immediately, you may be entitled to pursue applications for immigration benefits or the right to stay. Many people who have already filed applications or are in court have permission to remain in the U.S. while those cases are pending. In some instances, these notices were issued in error. If you have received this notice, you should speak to a trusted immigration legal services provider about your options.

On April 14, 2025, a federal judge blocked the termination of parole for those that came under a parole program from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, or Venezuela, for those whose parole was terminated with a general notice without any reasons that are specific to your case. If you fit this category and received a generic notification by email or through your USCIS online account, your parole remains valid.  If you are not sure whether you fit this category, speak with a trusted legal services provider. Stay in touch with a trusted legal organization, there will be updates.

The Trump administration’s Registration requirement for most undocumented immigrants is another hateful tactic in its campaign to cause panic and fear throughout the country. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been clear that the central purpose of Registration is to gather information about all noncitizens and use this information to locate, apprehend and remove them as quickly as possible. The new registration requirement took effect April 11, 2025.

The Trump Administration is rapidly expanding the 287(g) immigration enforcement program. This program worsens police discrimination and increases the risk of arrest, detention, and deportation for immigrants living in or traveling in places that participate in the 287(g) program.

Starting in December 2024, USCIS began conducting interviews for certain VAWA self-petitioners who have both an I-360 and an I-485 pending. ILRC and AILA’s VAWA, Us, and Ts committee compiled tips to help practitioners support VAWA self-petitioners through this additional layer of review while safeguarding their rights.

The Laken Riley Act (LRA) was signed into law by President Trump on January 29, 2025. It amends the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) by expanding mandatory detention of certain inadmissible noncitizens who are merely arrested or charged with certain offenses. This practice advisory addresses the question of whether the provisions of the LRA that seek to vastly increase the number of people subject to mandatory immigration detention would be triggered by children engaging in acts of juvenile delinquency. In the advisory, we argue that the answer is no, in alignment with longstanding precedent in immigration law that treats acts of juvenile delinquency as distinct from adult criminal acts. However, given that this is a new law with unclear drafting, we also provide tips for juvenile defense attorneys to help clients avoid charges that could implicate the mandatory detention provision of the LRA.

ILRC submitted a comment to the U.S. Department of State opposing a change in passport applications. DOS proposed the elimination of the X gender marker on initial, renewal and corrected passport applications and added the requirement that applicants designate and document M, Male or F, Female for biological sex at birth.

The Trump administration has ordered the prioritization of federal prosecutions for immigration-related offenses, including for simply entering the United States or reentering after removal without permission. Congress is considering budget proposals with hundreds of billions of dollars for border and immigration enforcement, including billions that would fund a dramatic increase in federal criminal prosecutions for immigration offenses. At the same time, some in Congress are again proposing legislation that would fuel mass incarceration by increasing penalties for those charged criminally for unauthorized reentry into the United States. This explainer describes how the budget proposals currently in Congress would fund mass prosecutions that have already had a deadly and costly impact over the years. It also explains how the proposed legislation would line the pockets of the private prison industry with enormous cost to taxpayers.

Last month, DHS issued a notice expanding the reach of expedited removal to individuals living in the interior of the United States. This would allow certain noncitizens to be deported without an opportunity to gather evidence, contact an attorney, or to present their case to a judge. Because of the devastating impact of expanded expedited removal, noncitizens should be informed of the risks of expedited removal and learn how to assert their rights in the face of possible removal under this changed enforcement policy. This toolkit is designed to help legal services practitioners and know-your-rights presenters assist and counsel people who might be subject to expedited removal in an encounter with ICE or CBP.

This practice advisory outlines the process for researching and commenting on federal forms. A previous advisory covers the process specific to commenting on regulations, which has many parallels to the forms comment process. Federal forms and their comment process are often overlooked by advocates, even those who regularly follow changes in regulations and comment on them. However, form changes can be significant and sometimes can be used to change policy by agencies. The statute regulating forms is the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).

In its first month, the Trump administration has issued dozens of executive orders (EO) that seek to limit access to the immigration system, target foreign nationals for political gain and sow chaos and fear among immigrant and advocate communities. This explainer focuses on aspects of the EOs that target immigration benefits, processing and adjudication.

Operation Lone Star (OLS) is an unconstitutional and deadly Texas law enforcement scheme that wastes vital state resources to target migrants for arrest, jail, and deportation. To date, nearly $11 billion has been spent on OLS. This policy brief delves into how misguided OLS has been for Texans from a financial perspective and provides recommendations for how OLS funds could be reinvested to support the everyday lives of Texans who need strengthened public services and infrastructure.

CBP has signed an agreement delegating immigration enforcement authority to the Texas National Guard. Under the President's "mass influx" declaration, local and state law enforcement agencies may take on civil immigration enforcement authority that they wouldn't otherwise have. These specific powers are designated in a Memorandum of Understanding signed with CBP. This quick explainer highlights what this MOU says, what this means for Texas, and how it relates to Operation Lone Star.

Following the new administration’s dramatic reorientation of all federal agencies into immigration enforcers, on January 21st, 2025, the DOJ issued a directive requiring all federal prosecutors to prioritize immigration prosecutions. The memorandum also threatens prosecutions and civil lawsuits to sanctuary jurisdictions and entities that seek to protect immigrants. In this analysis, we explain the different sections of the DOJ’s memo and what they mean for immigrants and federal courts nationwide.

On January 17th, 2025, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (“Court”) issued its latest decision in the ongoing DACA litigation. While nothing has changed, and current DACA recipients can continue to renew their DACA and obtain both protection from deportation and work authorization, it is important to understand what the current state of DACA is and what can change in the future.

In 2024, USCIS issued a new Form N-400, Application for Naturalization, with more lengthy and complicated instructions on evidence that could be included. This guide will help practitioners understand what documents naturalization applicants must submit to the USCIS to accept and adjudicate the N-400 form and when to submit each document.

New EOIR regulations published in 2024 now allow immigration judges and the BIA to administratively close or terminate removal proceedings in a variety of scenarios. These regulations permit—and sometimes require—administrative closure or termination even where the Department of Homeland Security does not agree. In the current hostile enforcement environment, and in light of the rescission of formal guidance regarding prosecutorial discretion, these regulations are an important tool for advocates seeking to get clients out of removal proceedings.