Practice Advisory

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.
This explainer provides information and context for the Department of Homeland Security’s proposed rule seeking to change Form AR-11, Change of Address. DHS proposes to add questions seeking information about a person’s employment or current schooling and whether they have received any means-tested benefit. The proposed form change is over-broad and will result in confusion for applicants who are required to update the government about their address changes. This rule is proposed and is NOT in effect yet.
USCIS has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate certain applications for immigration relief that protect survivors of crime and other forms of abuse. Many people who are in active removal proceedings are eligible for one or more of these forms of relief. In the past, it was often possible to postpone or terminate removal proceedings to pursue such relief at USCIS. However, current policies at the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) and increasingly negative caselaw from the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) have made navigating removal proceedings for these applicants extremely challenging. The challenges are exacerbated due to visa backlogs and USCIS adjudication delays for these forms of relief. This advisory provides an overview of affirmative relief for immigrant survivors, summarize recent BIA cases on point, and offer practice tips for protecting against removal.
On April 10, 2026, USCIS issued a new memo again terminating the SIJS deferred action (DA) policy (“April 10th Memo”). Under the April 10th Memo, USCIS will no longer automatically consider granting DA to young people granted SIJS. This termination memo does not, however, go into effect until May 10, 2026, and only applies to SIJS petitions filed on or after that date. This practice alert discusses what the April 10th Memo means for SIJS petitions and SIJS DA renewals filed prior to and on or after May 10, 2026, including helpful charts.
This practice alert, created in partnership with the End SIJS Backlog Coalition, explores a largely un-tested legal argument that young people with approved SIJS petitions can use the SIJS-specific adjustment provisions at INA § 245(h) to satisfy the “inspected and admitted or paroled” requirement to adjust using some other non-SIJS immigrant petition (for example, a spousal petition).
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.
In the current landscape of increased immigration enforcement, many noncitizens are considering the option of leaving the United States in order to return to their home country or to seek opportunities in a different country. In the current landscape of increased immigration enforcement, many noncitizens are considering the option of leaving the United States in order to return to their home country or to seek opportunities in a different country. This practice advisory provides guidance to immigration attorneys and advocates who are asked to provide such advice and walks through common issues for the client to consider before deciding to leave the United States. It also includes a checklist of helpful questions and information to review with the client before they depart.
This practice advisory is Part I of a two-part advisory on civil fines and civil penalties instituted by DHS against noncitizens. Part I discusses the procedures for instituting a fine and recommendations for contesting and appealing a civil fine instituted by DHS. Part II will discuss statutory and Constitutional arguments and defenses against the issuance of fines.