Results

This one-page guide provides an overview of Prosecutorial Discretion and how it can be applied when someone has come in contact with ICE.

This brief fact sheet explains the federal statute of 8 USC § 1373 and its relation to policies limiting compliance with immigration detainers or other immigration enforcement assistance by local law enforcement agencies, also called “Sanctuary Policies.”  These policies do not generally conflict with 8 USC § 1373 and therefore do not put localities in jeopardy of losing federal funds.

This resource contains a chart comparing various federal legislative proposals attacking sanctuary jurisdictions.

This community resource provides a brief explanation of the Immigration Court experience. It gives an overview of what happens in Immigration Court, how to confirm information about a case in Immigration Court, and what a person in removal proceedings should do if they do not have an attorney to represent them at an upcoming hearing. This information is useful for community members and advocates working with the immigrant community.

As many people consider exercising their right to protest, it’s important to note the unique harm certain convictions can cause for noncitizen protestors. Immigration consequences are highly specific and can typically only be determined by a thorough, case-by-case analysis. Nevertheless, this resource provides  key red flags and suggestions for California defenders representing noncitizen protestors.

ICE enforcement policies have changed under the Biden administration, and opened new opportunities to defend your clients from arrest, detention, and deportation.  This practice advisory from the ILRC, NIPNLG, and IDP provides immigration practitioners with an overview of the interim enforcement priorities and other key policy changes described in recent DHS and ICE memos, and discusses strategies to use these priorities to advocate for prosecutorial discretion.

Letter from 200+ National, State, and Local non-profit organizations opposing the Trump Mass Deportation Act (The Michael Davis, Jr. and Danny Oliver in Honor of State and Local Law Enforcement Act, H.R. 2431).

Summaries of key court decisions analyzing the legal and constitutional problems with ICE detainers and the liability of local agencies who hold individuals based on ICE detainers.

This one-page resource from the ILRC and the National Juvenile Justice Network illustrates the connections between the criminalization of young people of color in the youth justice system and the current criminalization of young immigrants of color.

A quick digest of the new DHS immigration enforcement priorities released in September 2021.

This letter was sent to all California County Counsel and Sheriff Offices to advise on Miranda-Olivares and urge jurisdictions to stop complying with Immigration detainers, unless or until such detainers are accompanied by a judicial determination of probable cause to satisfy the requirements of the Fourth Amendment.

This resource explains key provisions that Texas cities and counties can enact in order to protect immigrants in light of SB 4.

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.

The ILRC teamed up with community-based organizations Faith in the Valley and the Inland Coalition for Immigrant Justice, to file an amicus brief in support of California’s defense of SB 29 in GEO v. CA.  SB 29, codified at Cal. Civ. Code § 1670.9 and co-sponsored by the ILRC and Freedom for Immigrants, was passed in order ensure that the community would have a voice on an issue which so critically impacts them; immigration detention.  Our amicus details the importance of community engagement, as detailed in recent community battles to halt three new proposed immigration detention centers. Many thanks to Sidley Austin LLP for its generous support in the amicus. 

 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.

A primer on the Priority Enforcement Program (“PEP-Comm”) for local leaders and elected officials.

This advisory discusses the provisions of SB 54 (De Leon) and the California Values Act, relevant to criminal defense counsel who represent noncitizen clients. In addition to discussing specific provisions of the California Values Act, this advisory discusses how to incorporate this new law into your defense practice.

Starting in June 2019, Bexar County and San Antonio will implement "cite and release," a new administrative policy that seeks to reduce arrests. The policy directs law enforcement officers to use their discretion to issue citations for low-level, non-violent offenses.

Breaking! Today, Judge Sammartino issued an order upholding the constitutionality of AB 32, People over Profits, which prohibits private incarceration in the state of CA. The judge largely denied GEO/US’ request to enjoin AB 32, and granted portions of CA’s request to dismiss GEO/US’ lawsuit. Regrettably, the court preliminary enjoined AB 32 as to private USMS facilities.

President Trump issued an Executive Order on immigration enforcement in January 2017.  The Order included sections ordering that sanctuary cities would not be eligible to receive federal funding.  This fact sheet breaks down the key issues raised by the Executive Order, examining the possible meanings of the order, and the legal limitations on what the President can do.

ILRC along with our partners—ACLU, DWN, IDP, IJN, NIJC and NIPNLG—provide an analysis of the enforcement and crimmigration provisions in the Ryan and Goodlatte immigration bills and urge opposition to these bills.

This timeline provides an overview of ICE’s contracts with the City of Adelanto and GEO Group for immigration detention services at the Adelanto ICE Processing Center and how those contracts have evolved over time.

This resource, written by Human Impact Partners in collaboration with the ILRC and others as part of the Dignity Not Detention Coalition, outlines recommendations for what healthy, just, and supportive immigration policy can look like for unaccompanied youth immigrating to the US, without relying on detention or detention-like facilities. Rooted in the stories, experiences, and recommendations of young people who arrived in the US as unaccompanied youth, this resource draws from public health evidence documenting the health harms of detention in large-scale, restrictive settings. It puts forward a vision for ending the current system of detaining unaccompanied minors in harmful settings and for shaping healthy, just, and supportive immigration policy for unaccompanied youth. You can also check this resource for more important information from Human Impact Partners.

An advocate's review of various laws and policy that govern immigration enforcement against juveniles in California, including the TRUST Act (AB 4) and state confidentiality laws.

This detailed memo analyzes the authority of ICE administrative warrants and why they fail to meet Constitutional standards. The memo examines why DHS has decided to issue ICE warrants along with ICE detainers, and explains the similarities and differences between these two types of documents. The memo focuses on how the existence of administrative ICE warrants does not confer immigration authority onto local and state law enforcement officers.

This webinar covers the basics you need to know about how local law enforcement and other agencies work with ICE or CBP, and how to think about who are the likely local targets for organizing. We talk about identifying the key problems in your community, mobilizing important allies, and what kinds of stories can help drive the narrative. Experienced organizers from Juntos in Philadelphia and Grassroots Leadership in Austin talk about how they addressed these strategies in their local campaigns, and the importance of building alliances on criminal justice issues broadly.

COVID-19 has made one thing clear; when law enforcement cooperates with ICE this has dire public health implications. There have been renewed and urgent efforts to stop this cooperation, including a recently filed lawsuit California Attorneys for Criminal Justice, et al. v. Gavin Newsom, California Governor, et al., challenging the transfer of people from state and local custody to ICE in the midst of COVID-19. Ten current and former district attorneys and police chiefs from across California filed an amicus curiae letter brief in support of this lawsuit.  This letter brief was authored and organized by Fair and Just Prosecution, Immigrant Legal Resource Center, and Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP.