US v. Lopez: Ninth Circuit Holds Cal. Pen. Code § 273.5 not a Crime of Violence
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.
Ninth Circuit Rules on Due Diligence Standard for Equitable Tolling For Motions to Reopen
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.
Supreme Court Holds LPRs with Pending Criminal Charges May Be Deemed Applicants for Admission When Re-Entering the United States: Blanche v. Lau
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.
Immigration Consequences of Prop 36 and Other New California Offenses Part Two: Property Crime Offenses
This advisory is part II of a two-part advisory on the federal immigration consequences of California Proposition 36 enacted in December 2024. Part I on Prop 36 and controlled substance offenses is found here.
How To Defend Immigrants Charged With Drug Offenses in California Courts
Detailed defense strategies and options for noncitizens charged with drug offenses in California, with a brief summary of the immigration consequences of controlled substance convictions. Also includes an Appendix for pro se respondents to use for drug overbreadth arguments.
What Noncitizens and Citizens Should Know About Protecting Your Online Presence: Social media hygiene in a hostile immigration landscape
This explainer offers information for both noncitizens and U.S. citizens about the possible impacts of their social media online presence.
New Federal Post-Conviction Relief for Survivors of Human Trafficking and Potential Benefits for Noncitizen Defendants
The Trafficking Survivors Relief Act (TSRA) was passed on January 23, 2026, and provides new federal post-conviction relief options for those convicted of certain federal offenses that were committed as a direct result of having been a victim of human trafficking. This practice alert discusses the new law and potential benefits for noncitizen defendants.
What Every Noncitizen Must Know About Cannabis and Immigration
Despite new state laws legalizing cannabis for recreational use, archaic U.S. drug laws still classify marijuana as federally illegal. Because immigration is governed by federal law, this means that noncitizens may face serious problems down the line if they are not aware of how their experiences with cannabis could impact their immigration journey. This video and accompanying infographic detail the specific risks associated with the use or possession of cannabis and/or industry employment.
Infographic about California Post-Conviction Relief Vehicles
This one-page infographic summarizes the various California post-conviction relief vehicles, their requirements, and their immigration benefits.
Table of California PCR Cases
This case table of California post-conviction relief decisions is designed to help practitioners quickly find the cases they need.
Challenging EOIR Bond Denials in Federal Court
When an immigration judge denies bond based on a finding that a person is a danger to the community or a flight risk, what options remain to challenge that decision? As immigration detention expands and bond denials become increasingly common, federal court litigation is emerging as a critical tool to obtain judicial review of these determinations.
California Crimes Summaries
This page offers resources on “crim/imm,” the law governing the intersection of immigration and crimes, especially as it applies to California law.
California Penal Code § 245(a) is not a Crime of Violence
On January 13, 2026, the Ninth Circuit issued an en banc decision holding that a violation of California Penal Code § 245(a)(1) (assault with a deadly weapon) is not a crime of violence. United States v. Gomez, No. 23-435 (9th Cir., Jan. 13, 2026) (en banc).
ILRC Comment to DHS on FOIA Final Rule
ILRC submitted this comment to DHS opposing recent changes to FOIA rules effective January 22, 2026 that restrict public access. DHS published a final rule in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act by unlawfully bypassing public notice and comment. The rule eliminates paper filing of FOIA requests and allows DHS in its discretion to administratively close requests that it deems to insufficiently describe the records sought.
Attacks on FOIA Continue
On December 22, 2025, DHS published a final rule impacting processing of FOIA requests by all DHS components. The rule is effective January 22, 2026. Despite the major changes made by the rule, no period of public comment was provided. The rule eliminates paper filing of FOIA requests with DHS as of January 22, 2026. FOIAs to DHS must be filed online after that date. The rule also states that DHS can, in its discretion, administratively close or make “requests for clarification” where it deems the request to be an inadequate description of the records sought.
Pros and Cons of Applying for a U Visa
Under the current administration there has been much discussion about whether filing a U nonimmigrant status (“U visa”) petition is risky considering the long processing times, the lack of protection given to applicants while they wait for relief, and the increased enforcement climate. This advisory will lay out some of the main “pros” and “cons” to applying for U nonimmigrant status as they exist now, to help practitioners explain to prospective applicants how to weigh benefits and risks and make an informed decision on how to proceed with their case.
Immigration Dragnet: The New Era of 287(g)
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.
Immigration Consequences of Prop 36 and Other New California Offenses: Part One, Controlled Substance Offenses
This advisory discusses the immigration consequences of a conviction for a controlled substance offense under California Prop 36, specifically Cal. H&S Code § 11395. This advisory explains the immigration consequences of a criminal plea to a Prop 36 controlled substance offense. It outlines criminal defense strategies for defenders to avoid these pleas and outlines removal defense strategies for immigration practitioners where the plea cannot be avoided.
Gonzalez v. ICE Advisory for Criminal Defense Attorneys
Step by step explanation for criminal defense counsel of how to identify ICE detainers that may be issued in violation of the Gonzalez v. ICE class action. This class action settlement applies nation-wide to limit ICE’s issuance of detainers. This advisory walks through the basics of the case and how to monitor and respond to any violations of the settlement.
Discussing Registration with Clients
On April 11, 2025, the new Form G-325R took effect as a general tool to register all previously unregistered noncitizens under an antiquated and rarely invoked provision of the Immigration & Nationality Act, with criminal penalties for willful failure to register. This advisory was written to assist attorneys in discussing registration and the new Form G-325R with clients, including screening for prior registration and assessing the potential consequences of registering or not registering, so that individuals can make informed decisions about how to proceed in light of this new rule.
The Laken Riley Act & Juvenile Delinquency
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
Immigration Relief Toolkit for Criminal Defenders
Many noncitizen defendants are already deportable (“removable”). This includes all undocumented people, as well as lawful permanent residents (green card-holders) who have become deportable because of a conviction. If immigration authorities find these people – which is likely to happen – they will be deported unless they are granted some kind of immigration relief. For these defendants, staying eligible to apply for immigration relief is their most important immigration goal, and may be their highest priority in the criminal defense.
EOIR Regulation Limits Retroactivity of Matter of Thomas & Thompson Regarding Sentence Modifications
On October 25, 2019, the Attorney General published Matter of Thomas & Thompson holding that adjudicators could only recognize a sentence modification for immigration purposes where the sentence was vacated due to procedural or substantive defect as defined in Matter of Pickering. It was not clear whether this holding was retroactive. Under new DOJ regulations it is now clear that Matter of Thomas & Thompson is not retroactive. Adjudicators will recognize a sentence modification as vacating the sentence for immigration purposes where: (1) the person filed for the sentence modification on or
Template Brief on Why California Cannabis Convictions on or after 11/9/2016 are not Grounds for Removal
Since November 9, 2016, the definition of cannabis under California law is different and broader than the federal definition. Therefore, a California conviction for cannabis from on or after that date is arguably not a controlled substance conviction under federal immigration law. No court has yet made a finding on this issue for California offenses, but they have done so in other states with similar cannabis definitions. This template brief can be used to file a Motion to Terminate Proceedings or to file an Opposition to a Motion to Pretermit Proceedings (where the client is applying for
Proposition 36 Is Bad for Immigrants. This is Why.
Prop 47 (2014) reclassified six felony offenses to misdemeanors, including shoplifting and simple drug possession, and funneled costs savings into safety measures like drug and mental health treatment and victim services centers. Proposed Prop 36 (November 2024) would roll back those reforms and add new criminal penalties and sentencing enhancements. Prop 36 will also impose severe immigration consequences on immigrants and their families. It will result in more Californians being deported and more families being separated. This resource provides some of the specific examples of the ways in
ILRC Comments on Proposed Marijuana Rescheduling
On July 23, 2024, the ILRC provide comment on the Biden Administration’s proposed re-scheduling of marijuana. The ILRC advocated for the complete de-scheduling of marijuana instead of rescheduling. The comment highlighted the racist impacts of maintaining marijuana on the schedule of controlled substances and the lack of any mitigating effect that rescheduling will have on immigration consequences of marijuana-related crimes
Worksheet: California Post-Conviction Relief for Immigrants
Thousands of noncitizens in California are at risk of removal because they have criminal convictions that were unlawfully imposed. California law provides several ways to eliminate these convictions with post-conviction relief (PCR). The challenge is that there are not enough PCR experts to meet the need, especially for low-income immigrants.
Options for Survivors in Criminal Court
Criminal Convictions can have serious consequences on peoples’ lives – especially non-citizens who wish to stay in the United States. Many immigration benefits have criminal bars, meaning that certain convictions will prevent you from getting a lawful immigration status, like permanent residence (green card). This Community Explainer offers some options for those who have had certain convictions related to domestic violence or human trafficking, with insights about how to define these crimes, some example scenarios, and explanations about the benefits of a legal tool called a “vacatur.”
"Particularly Serious Crime" Bars to Asylum and Withholding
This advisory analyzes and explains the particularly serious crime bar to asylum and withholding of removal. It describes the factors to consider in determining whether a crime is a "particularly serious crime" and how to challenge a particularly serious crime determination.
Operation Lone Star: The Cost of Funding Hate
In Texas, Black and Latinx migrants are being harmed by Operation Lone Star- an unconstitutional and racist law enforcement operation that is criminalizing migrants who are seeking safety in the U.S. border. Operation Lone Star is a complex scheme involving multiple law enforcement agencies in the state. This comprehensive resource explains how Operation Lonestar is being implemented and funded, explains why this operation is illegal and unconstitutional, highlights how this scheme expands the carceral and enforcement systems, and how it’s harming entire border communities.