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.
In a flawed but significant decision, the Ninth Circuit held that California Penal Code § 243(d), battery with injury, is a crime of violence. United States v. Perez (9th Cir. July 11, 2019). Because of Perez, criminal defenders must assume that § 243(d) is a crime of violence and seek other dispositions when necessary. Immigration advocates should appeal adverse decisions and preserve the argument on appeal. See this Advisory for a discussion of the decision, alternative pleas, and suggestions for arguments.
On July 23, 2019, DHS issued a notice, expanding the reach of expedited removal to individuals who have been living in the United States for two years or less, and who live anywhere in the United States. This would allow noncitizens to be deported without an opportunity to gather evidence or to present their case to a judge. On August 6, 2019, the American Immigration Council, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the law firm of Simpson Thatcher & Bartlett LLP filed suit challenging the legality of this expansion, Make the Road New York v. McAleenan, Case 1:19-cv-02369. On September 27, 2019, the court granted a preliminary injunction in this case, which blocks the expansion of expedited removal from taking effect while the court decides the case.
On Tuesday, July 16, 2019, ILRC Executive Director, Eric Cohen, testified before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship about the current dysfunctional state of our country’s naturalization program. He joined representatives from the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) and Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (CLINIC) to shed light on how USCIS policy changes and processing delays are negatively impacting those seeking immigration benefits and our country as a whole.
It is time that we pass laws to build communities that are healthy and thriving, instead of ones torn apart by criminalization, biased policing, incarceration, and deportation. To secure the full human rights of all members of our communities, we need a new way forward for immigrant justice—one that ends senseless divisions of “good versus bad” immigrants and recognizes that all communities deserve dignity, restoration and repair, not further criminalization. This one-pager explains A New Way Forward campaign.
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.
This practice advisory provides an overview of ways to advocate with USCIS and DHS components for solutions to individual case problems and systemic issues.
The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 confers initial jurisdiction over asylum claims filed by unaccompanied children (UCs) to the asylum office. The Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision in Matter of M-A-C-O-, as well as policy changes by the Trump administration have sought to strip away this crucial protection from many child asylum seekers. Because of these changes and legal challenges by immigrant youth advocates, the current landscape of initial UC asylum jurisdiction is in flux. This practice advisory provides an overview of the current state of UC asylum jurisdiction following the Matter of M-A-C-O- decision and issuance of the Lafferty Memo. It also discusses the ongoing JOP v. DHS litigation and gives some arguments and tips for practitioners to help them advocate for their UC clients to receive the statutory protections afforded by the TVPRA.
Noncitizen victims of violence, serious crimes, and persecution may be eligible for certain forms of immigration protection and status. These options are often referred to as Humanitarian Forms of Relief. They include: T nonimmigrant status, U nonimmigrant status, VAWA self-petition, asylum, and special immigrant juvenile status.
This advisory is the second in a two-part series on unlawful presence and unlawful presence waivers. This advisory covers the requirements and process for the provisional waiver, as well as updates and pitfalls to avoid in light of recent changes that have made pursuing the provisional waiver process more challenging. These include: State Department updates to public charge guidance and increased visa denials based on public charge inadmissibility at the consulate, Attorney General decisions in Matter of Castro-Tum and Matter of S-O-G & F-D-B- making it more difficult to pursue the provisional waiver in removal proceedings, heightened risk pursuing the conditional I-212 option as part of the provisional waiver expansion given updated enforcement priorities, and new considerations for preparing and filing provisional waiver cases in light of new USCIS policy memos on RFEs/NOIDs and Notices to Appear.
Practice Update: Issuance of Notices to Appear (NTAs) in Denied Humanitarian-based Immigration Cases
Over the last month, some practitioners have reported that USCIS has issued a number of NTAs in connection with denied U and T visa applications. Given these reports, ILRC, ASISTA, CAST, Freedom Network USA, American Association of Immigration Lawyers (AILA), and Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Los Angeles created a practice update to address some of the actions practitioners can take in individual cases as well as to support policy-level advocacy efforts.
Advocates and community members can work together to fight messages of fear and panic by helping community members learn about their rights and how to protect themselves from ICE. The Immigrant Legal Resource Center has created a variety of materials to educate the community and prepare individuals for possible encounters with immigration authorities.
On June 5, 2019, the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) published a third notice regarding its plans to dramatically change fee waiver eligibility and process. The June 5 notice attempts to provide additional justification for its plan to eliminate means-tested benefits as a basis for requesting a fee waiver, among other changes, following April 5 and September 28 notices that lacked rationale for why such changes to fee waivers are justified. Now, USCIS is also claiming lost fee revenue as a reason for its proposed changes to fee waivers, making clear its intention to reduce the number of fee waivers that are granted. If finalized, these proposed changes will discourage eligible individuals from filing for fee waivers and immigration benefits and place heavy time and resource burdens on those who do still apply for fee waivers.
For noncitizens, even a low level offense like a shoplifting conviction can lead to mandatory deportation. However, this can be avoided when people secure post-conviction relief to erase or modify their old convictions. If the convictions are vacated, or the sentences reduced, the grounds for removal often evaporate.
Under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), any noncitizen who “within five years from the date of entry, has become a public charge from causes not affirmatively shown to have arisen since entry is deportable.” In current practice, this ground of deportability rarely comes up in pending removal proceedings or as a reason for the initiation of removal proceedings.
Gubernatorial pardons have become an increasingly important and accessible tool for immigrants to erase certain immigration consequences of criminal convictions. This two-page primer, written in collaboration with the UCLA School of Law Criminal Defense Clinic and available in both English and Spanish, provides an overview of the California Pardon process for potential applicants and their advocates.
Diversion refers to a variety of programs that seek to avoid the processing of a defendant through the traditional criminal legal system. The goal of diversion is to direct an individual who has been accused of a crime into a treatment or care program as an alternative to imprisonment and/or prosecution.
This advisory covers three possible immigration remedies that beneficiaries might be able to pursue if a family member dies during the immigration process.
As the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration policies have increasingly come under scrutiny, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), a division within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), has played an increasingly significant role in carrying out brutal tactics to target immigrants for deportation.
FAQ about ICE’s newest model of 287(g), the Warrant Service Officer (WSO) program.
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.
This resource, co-authored by the ILRC and United We Dream (UWD), compares the criminal and inadmissibility grounds for Titles I and II of the American Dream and Promise Act of 2019 with DACA and TPS.
This resource, co-authored by the Immigrant Justice Network (IJN) and the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC), discusses the immigration consequences of discriminatory practices within the criminal legal system. IJN is a network comprised of the ILRC, the Immigrant Defense Project (IDP), and the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild.
This resource, co-authored by the Immigrant Justice Network (IJN) and the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC), discusses the immigration consequences of discriminatory practices within the criminal legal system. IJN is a network comprised of the ILRC, the Immigrant Defense Project (IDP), and the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild.
This resource, co-authored by the Immigrant Justice Network (IJN) and the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC), discusses how mandatory detention impacts individuals. IJN is a network comprised of the ILRC, the Immigrant Defense Project (IDP), and the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild.