The Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC) immigration attorneys’ expertise focuses on family-based immigration, humanitarian relief, naturalization and citizenship, immigration enforcement, and removal defense.
Since 1979 we have helped expand the immigration expertise of attorneys, nonprofit staff, criminal defenders, and others assisting immigrant clients.
In addition to authoring the ILRC’s practice manuals, our expert attorneys have been published by Continuing Education of the Bar (CEB), American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), ILW.com, Huffington Post, Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law, Center for Law and Social Policy, The Hill, LexisNexis Emerging Issues, and Fox News Latino.
We have also provided training to National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), American Bar Association Commission on Immigration, Federal Bar Association, The State Bar of California, Legal Aid Association of California, Judicial Council of California and more.
Mark Silverman, ILRC Director of Immigration Policy, discusses concerns about fraud under the SAW program and why fraud is less likely to occur under a future legalization program.
In Moncrieffe v. Holder, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed that the full categorical approach applies in immigration proceedings. A result is that where the criminal statute defines the offense more broadly than the immigration definition at issue, the conviction will not trigger the immigration penalty.
Drawing from our experiences during and after IRCA, we offer a brief analysis of some of the legalization aspects of the recently introduced Senate Bill—the “Border Security, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013.” We divide our discussion broadly into the positive and negative features of provisions in Senate Bill 744 (S.744) that relate to the length of the path to citizenship, eligibility requirements, and confidentiality provisions, and compare these to the provisions that existed under IRCA.
Today, the U.S. House of Representatives approved an amendment by Rep. Steve King (R-IA) to HR 2217, the “Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act2014.” This amendment denies funding to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to implement and administer several important programs, including the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Program.
New Advocacy Guide for ICE's massive Criminal Alien Program (CAP), from the National Immigrant Project, Washington Defenders Association, and the Immigrant Legal Resource Center.
A manual for organizers on how to prevent local law enforcement from holding immigrants for ICE.
The powerpoint focuses on the paths to citizenship, future flow, and enforcement provisions that are in the Senate immigration reform bill titled “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act” (S. 744).
The charts lay out the path to citizenship for undocumented individuals, DREAMers, and agricultural workers based on the Senate bill “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013” (S.744). It also summarizes the eligibility requirements and bars at each stage of the process.
Immigration reform has only been approved by the Senate, but as the bill currently stands, S.744 changes several things about the family-based system and also adds merit-based tracks. This document summarizes the proposed changes and additions.
Starting January 1, 2014, a conviction for transportation under H&S 11352 and 11379 will automatically qualify as a drug trafficking aggravated felony. AB 721, signed into law on October 3, 2013, redefines transport to include only transportation for sale and now excludes transportation for personal use.
These policies include city and county ordinances and administrative policies, as well as state laws, all of which limit the compliance of local law enforcement with ICE holds to some degree. Many other campaigns are ongoing; pending legislation or policies are not yet included here.
Highlighting Changes Implemented by the Trafficking Victims Protection and Reauthorization Act (03/2009): These are materials from our March 2009 webinar which highlighted important new changes implemented by the Trafficking Victims Protection and Reauthorization Act of 2008 (signed into law on December 23, 2008) to the eligibility requirements for filing a Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) petition. Expert practitioners provided strategies to overcome challenges posed in obtaining SIJS, including obtaining juvenile court orders from dependency, delinquency, and probate courts and obtaining specific consent to apply for SIJS while a child is in federal custody. If you are interested in participating in this webinar if held in the future please email seminars@ilrc.org.
Written by Doug DiSalvo East Bay Citizenship Network May 1999
Immigration Benchbook for Juvenile and Family Courts, Updated July 2010 (PDF, 2010) This is a national benchbook for juvenile and family court judges on various immigration related issues including: Special Immigrant Juvenile Status, adoption, VAWA, U Visas, divorce, child custody, immigration consequences of delinquency and crime, and immigration enforcement.
These three charts, updated in 2024, outline the different requirements for acquiring and deriving citizenship. Because the law governing acquisition and derivation has changed many times and is generally not retroactive, these charts detail what the eligibility requirements are depending on the time period in question. Each chart has extensive footnotes that provide explanations about the legal requirements, possible arguments where there is any ambiguity, and cites to further resources.
On September 6, 2011, USCIS issued a policy memorandum on adjudications of VAWA self-petitions for applicants who are over 21 but under 25 years of age.
This model code was written as a collaboration between our staff and accredited representatives around the country. It was inspired, in part, by the complaint heard occasionally (mostly from attorneys) that, while attorneys have a code of ethics to which they are bound, accredited representatives have no such code.
A description of critical resources available for California criminal defenders defending noncitizens:
Updated October 2012! A guide to assist public defenders and other to determine the immigration consequences of selected Arizona offenses.
Practice advisory by Katherine Brady on the Supreme Court case Nijhawan v. Holder, which deals with the categorical approach and aggravated felonies.