On Friday, May 26, 2026, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) office released a notice for clients of former immigration attorney Alexandra Lozano. USCIS urges applicants represented by former attorney Alexandra Lozano, who marketed herself as “la milagrosa” (miracle worker), to update their mailing address and informs them that they can withdraw their application or petition by submitting a written request. USCIS, however, fails to explain the consequences of withdrawing an application or petition. In this community alert, we will address some frequently asked questions.

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.

This advisory seeks to clarify which provisions of the new BIA Procedural rules are currently in effect, and which are not.

On June 24, 2026, the ILRC submitted a comment opposing proposed changes to the USCIS change of address Form AR-11.

On June 22, 2026, the Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC) submitted a comment opposing ICE’s proposed rule to increase the fee imposed on individuals ordered removed in absentia from $5,130 to $18,000.

As 287(g) agreements rapidly expand across the country, more law enforcement agencies are being radically transformed into a sweeping immigration enforcement machine. Police agencies are choosing to enter into the most expansive and harmful 287(g) agreement available, the Task Force Model. This policy brief provides a breakdown of the Task Force Model and how it provides carte blanche for rampant racial profiling, unbridled civil rights abuses, and little to no federal oversight.

Shortly after the Trump administration took office in 2025, the government began its directives to ramp up immigration raids and public operations across the country. These large-scale campaigns of mass deportation further exploded after the so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”, or H.R. 1, ballooned the DHS budget to an astronomical $170,700,000,000 of taxpayer dollars over the next four years; creating a new annual ICE budget that is larger than the entire defense budgets of Italy, the Netherlands, Brazil, and Switzerland.

This step-by-step guide will walk you through the steps for filing your first petition for habeas corpus (immigration) in the Northern District of California.

This explainer offers information for both noncitizens and U.S. citizens about the possible impacts of their social media online presence.

This practice alert is intended to help advocates and practitioners grapple with the latest policy memo on discretion and adjustment of status dated May 21, 2026.

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.

In this community explainer we will discuss some questions that have been raised since the publication of the memo as well as practical considerations for family-based applicants for adjustment of status.

On May 4, 2026, The Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC) submitted a formal comment opposing proposed changes to the EOIR-33 change-of-address form, arguing that the revisions are procedurally improper and substantively harmful.

On April 23, 2026, the Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC) submitted a comment opposing a proposed rule that would significantly limit work authorization for asylum seekers. The ILRC comments that the rule would drastically restrict access to work permits and make it nearly impossible for many asylum seekers to survive while their cases are pending. It highlights that the proposal would lengthen wait times, add new eligibility barriers, and allow broad discretionary denials, effectively undermining the asylum system and deterring legitimate applicants. The ILRC contends the rule would cause severe economic, social, and health harms, including lost wages, increased exploitation, family instability, and reduced access to legal representation and basic services, while also disproportionately harming immigrants of color. Additionally, the ILRC criticizes related form changes as unlawful and overly burdensome, concluding that the proposal lacks evidence to support its stated goals and urging DHS and USCIS to withdraw it entirely.

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 case table of California post-conviction relief decisions is designed to help practitioners quickly find the cases they need.

This step-by-step guide will walk you through the steps for filing your first petition for habeas corpus (immigration) in the Eastern District of California.

The U.S. Department of Justice transferred out all permanent staff from the Recognition and Accreditation program in March 2026, rendering the future of the program uncertain. ILRC wrote to DOJ demanding reinstatement of staff and a return to reasonable processing times for applications.

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.

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).