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.
Increasingly prosecutors are asked to consider immigration consequences in the charging and plea-bargaining process. Some states have adopted policies requiring prosecutors to consider such consequences, see, e.g., Cal. Pen. C. § 1016.3(b), and some prosecutor offices have adopted internal guidelines mandating the consideration of immigration consequences. This advisory provides context for why such a prosecutorial policy or practice is legally necessary and permitted, if not mandated, by constitutional law and governing codes of conduct.
Protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) is an important relief option for individuals who are unable to qualify for asylum or withholding of removal. This advisory reviews the legal standard for CAT protection. It also provides an overview of seminal Board of Immigration Appeals and federal circuit court decisions that discuss the various elements of a CAT claim. The end of the advisory contains a useful chart which compares asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT.
U nonimmigrant status and T nonimmigrant status, often called “U visas” and “T visas,” are humanitarian forms of immigration relief for crime survivors. Congress created these forms of relief with the dual purpose of aiding law enforcement, by encouraging crime victims to cooperate, and providing humanitarian relief for crime survivors. Both forms of relief have a certification process by which applicants request certification from a law enforcement agency to document their cooperation. In recent years, many states have enacted U and T visa certification legislation in order to assist eligible immigrants in obtaining law enforcement certifications. This practice advisory provides a summary of the current and pending state statutes regarding certifications as of March 2020.
The ILRC’s Immigration Preparedness Toolkit is a resource-packed informational document designed to help immigrants with no legal status or in mixed status families begin to understand the immigration legal landscape and plan for their own journey through an ever-changing, complex system in the United States. This free toolkit offers in-depth, yet easily accessible information that outlines the basics about a variety of topics including: your rights during ICE confrontations, the different types of immigration options available, ideas for building your consultation roadmap, and tips on covering your bases while waiting for relief. This 13-page resource also incorporates links to other helpful reference documents, fact sheets, and tools readers can use to construct their own personalized plan.
In 2016, California passed California Penal Code § 1473.7, a critical post-conviction relief vehicle for people no longer in criminal custody to move to eliminate prior convictions that violated constitutional and statutory rights to due process and effective assistance of counsel. Under decades of legal precedent, prior offenses vacated on this basis are outside the federal immigration definition of "conviction." Nevertheless, some DHS attorneys incorrectly argue that § 1473.7 vacaturs are not effective for immigration purposes. This practice advisory, a Sample Memorandum of Law and Table of BIA Cases, presents arguments and precedent for refuting DHS's arguments.
As more and more jurisdictions are contemplating releasing people from jails and prisons, it is critical that we consider ways to ensure that people released are not immediately transferred to the harmful deportation system. ILRC, together with our allies, Asian Prisoners Support Committee, Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus, and California Alliance for Youth and Criminal Justice, put together this list of recommendations that advocates can use to demand responsible releases.
Over the years, various courts throughout the country have agreed that prolonging custody of a person solely based on an ICE detainer request is unlawful for numerous reasons. This practice advisory provides a summary of the court decisions related to ICE detainers and the arguments to challenge localities that continue to detain people for ICE. The cases discussed here illustrate some of the detailed arguments that are developing over what the Fourth Amendment requires and what is authorized or not by federal and state laws.
The Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice are ramping up efforts to investigate U.S. citizens and pursue denaturalization cases. This will result in many U.S. citizens being denaturalized and losing their citizenship. These efforts will have a chilling effect on the number of legal permanent residents applying for U.S. citizenship and will further burden a system that is already delayed in adjudicating and granting immigration benefits. This Practice Advisory reviews the present state of denaturalization and revocation of citizenship. It thoroughly reviews the statutes and caselaw to date in denaturalization and revocation of citizenship. Practitioners handling these cases will find this Practice Advisory to be very useful when defending U.S. citizens who are under the threat of having their citizenship torn away from them.
These printable resources are concise handouts that serve as reminders for those in the immigrant community that are anxious about accessing healthcare or getting treatment related to the coronavirus (Covid-19) due to the potential impact on their Public Charge assessment. They are in English and in Spanish and include links to know your rights and locate legal service providers in your area.
ILRC sent a request to USCIS headquarters to provide more information and to also take certain actions to deal with the consequences of the closure of USCIS public services and the impact of COVID-19 on the immigrant public. These are concerns raised by the individuals and organizations with whom we partner. We have promised to raise more issues as the emergency situation continues.
The VAWA Self-Petition allows abused immigrants to petition for legal status independently of their abuser. The process mirrors that of the family-based process but frees the victim from having to rely on the abuser’s cooperation to file a family-based petition. Under VAWA, an abused spouse or child of a lawful permanent resident (LPR) or U.S. citizen (USC), or an abused parent of a USC son or daughter can submit a self-petition on their own. Individuals who qualify for VAWA are able to include derivatives on their applications and both the principal and derivative are able to gain immigration benefits through the process. This practice advisory provides information on derivatives for the VAWA self-petition process as well as considerations to keep in mind when filing an application.
The American Immigration Council, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, ASISTA Immigration Assistance, the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc., the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, Kids in Need of Defense, and the Tahirih Justice Center submitted this comment in response to the proposed revisions to USCIS Form I-290B, which were published in the Federal Register on December 6, 2019.
This advisory provides an overview of the most common types of motions filed with the Board of Immigration Appeals. It discusses the types of motions the Board will accept while proceedings are pending before it, such as motions to remand. It also discusses motions filed with the Board after it has issued a final order of removal, which includes motions to reconsider and motions to reopen. It contains guidelines on determining what type of motion is appropriate in specific circumstances and how to prepare and file motions in a way that meets legal requirements and complies with the Board’s procedural rules.
This advisory provides an overview of the immigration consequences of delinquency and helps advocates understand the distinctions between delinquency and crime to be able to assess whether a youth has committed an act of delinquency or a crime. It arms advocates with arguments to protect their noncitizen clients who have engaged in unlawful conduct as minors.
This advisory seeks to clarify when, where, and how to file an I-212. It also discusses certain special circumstances such as conditional I-212s, nunc pro tunc I-212s, and how a grant to TPS or advance parole may affect the need for an I-212. The advisory addresses strategic concerns such as deciding when to file a motion to reopen versus a conditional I-212, and assessing the risks of triggering other inadmissibility or enforcement issues when advising clients.
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.
Although the TVPRA exempts unaccompanied children (UCs) from the one-year filing deadline for asylum, the current administration has been attempting to erode these protections. As a result, many UCs are at risk of losing their statutory protections and being subjected to the one-year filing deadline. This practice advisory provides UC advocates with an overview of the deadline, the exceptions for changed and extraordinary circumstances, and specific tips on satisfying this requirement in UC cases.
In response to recent ICE enforcement practices, noncitizens who need to attend state and local courts in California may express fear of civil arrest if they attend court. This two-page tool, written for defenders and legal services providers, presents California-specific strategies for representing and advising noncitizens who may require additional procedural protections for their right to attend court. It includes discussion of recent California laws and how they affect daily court practice, as well as recommendations for documenting unlawful civil arrests and for empowering communities to exercise their rights if confronted by ICE.
On March 12, 2020 households began receiving invitations to complete the 2020 Census. Because of the pandemic, households now have until September 30, 2020 to complete their responses either online, by paper, or by telephone.
This one-hour training, recorded on February 4, 2020, provides updates on what the U.S. Supreme Court's January 27, 2020 order regarding the Department of Homeland Security's new public charge inadmissibility rule means for our clients and the immigrant community. We also discuss what we know and what questions remain at this juncture, suggestions for how to talk about this latest development regarding public charge, and initial thoughts about how to approach adjustment of status cases in light of these changes. Adjustment cases filed with USCIS before February 24, 2020 will be decided based on old criteria in effect before the new rule.
This toolkit and webinar from ILRC, CLINIC, and the Center for Constitutional Rights provide and introduction and advice for how immigrant rights advocates can use public records act requests to get information on how immigrants are treated by local and state government agencies. These requests can be an essential part of campaigns to protect immigrant communities.
Since 2015, the process of immigrating to the United States as the spouse of a USC or an LPR should not be any different for an LGBTQ couple than any other couple. However, advocates working with LGBTQ couples may need to consider a variety of factors when documenting and providing representation for an LGBTQ marriage-based petition. For example, is the couple currently living a jurisdiction where they can lawfully marry? And, if not, what other options does a couple have? And how might a marriage-based petition packet look if the couple has not shared their marriage or LGBTQ identity with one or both of their families? This advisory will address the first step of the marriage-based immigration process for same-sex married couples: submitting evidence of a bona fide marriage. It will also discuss red flags to address when preparing such applications and strategies for preventing fraud accusations by USCIS.
Enacted on December 20, 2019, the Liberian Refugee Immigration Fairness (LIRF) act began a program that will allow many Liberians living in the United States to apply for permanent residence. The statute originally had a one-year application window that ended on December 20, 2020, but Congress extended the application period another year to December 20, 2021 in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021.