Areas of Expertise

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.

Last month, DHS issued a notice expanding the reach of expedited removal to individuals living in the interior of the United States. This would allow certain noncitizens to be deported without an opportunity to gather evidence, contact an attorney, or to present their case to a judge. Because of the devastating impact of expanded expedited removal, noncitizens should be informed of the risks of expedited removal and learn how to assert their rights in the face of possible removal under this changed enforcement policy. This toolkit is designed to help legal services practitioners and know-your-rights presenters assist and counsel people who might be subject to expedited removal in an encounter with ICE or CBP.
In its first month, the Trump administration has issued dozens of executive orders (EO) that seek to limit access to the immigration system, target foreign nationals for political gain and sow chaos and fear among immigrant and advocate communities. This explainer focuses on aspects of the EOs that target immigration benefits, processing and adjudication.
This practice advisory outlines the process for researching and commenting on federal forms. A previous advisory covers the process specific to commenting on regulations, which has many parallels to the forms comment process. Federal forms and their comment process are often overlooked by advocates, even those who regularly follow changes in regulations and comment on them. However, form changes can be significant and sometimes can be used to change policy by agencies. The statute regulating forms is the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).
On January 17th, 2025, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (“Court”) issued its latest decision in the ongoing DACA litigation. While nothing has changed, and current DACA recipients can continue to renew their DACA and obtain both protection from deportation and work authorization, it is important to understand what the current state of DACA is and what can change in the future.
Operation Lone Star (OLS) is an unconstitutional and deadly Texas law enforcement scheme that wastes vital state resources to target migrants for arrest, jail, and deportation. To date, nearly $11 billion has been spent on OLS. This policy brief delves into how misguided OLS has been for Texans from a financial perspective and provides recommendations for how OLS funds could be reinvested to support the everyday lives of Texans who need strengthened public services and infrastructure.
CBP has signed an agreement delegating immigration enforcement authority to the Texas National Guard. Under the President's "mass influx" declaration, local and state law enforcement agencies may take on civil immigration enforcement authority that they wouldn't otherwise have. These specific powers are designated in a Memorandum of Understanding signed with CBP. This quick explainer highlights what this MOU says, what this means for Texas, and how it relates to Operation Lone Star.
Following the new administration’s dramatic reorientation of all federal agencies into immigration enforcers, on January 21st, 2025, the DOJ issued a directive requiring all federal prosecutors to prioritize immigration prosecutions. The memorandum also threatens prosecutions and civil lawsuits to sanctuary jurisdictions and entities that seek to protect immigrants. In this analysis, we explain the different sections of the DOJ’s memo and what they mean for immigrants and federal courts nationwide.
In 2024, USCIS issued a new Form N-400, Application for Naturalization, with more lengthy and complicated instructions on evidence that could be included. This guide will help practitioners understand what documents naturalization applicants must submit to the USCIS to accept and adjudicate the N-400 form and when to submit each document.
The Laken Riley Act (LRA) was signed into law by President Trump on January 29, 2025. It amends the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) by expanding mandatory detention of certain inadmissible noncitizens who are merely arrested or charged with certain offenses. This practice advisory addresses the question of whether the provisions of the LRA that seek to vastly increase the number of people subject to mandatory immigration detention would be triggered by children engaging in acts of juvenile delinquency. In the advisory, we argue that the answer is no, in alignment with longstanding precedent in immigration law that treats acts of juvenile delinquency as distinct from adult criminal acts. However, given that this is a new law with unclear drafting, we also provide tips for juvenile defense attorneys to help clients avoid charges that could implicate the mandatory detention provision of the LRA.
New EOIR regulations published in 2024 now allow immigration judges and the BIA to administratively close or terminate removal proceedings in a variety of scenarios. These regulations permit—and sometimes require—administrative closure or termination even where the Department of Homeland Security does not agree. In the current hostile enforcement environment, and in light of the rescission of formal guidance regarding prosecutorial discretion, these regulations are an important tool for advocates seeking to get clients out of removal proceedings.
Since Donald Trump was re-elected, headlines on immigration have sounded the alarm about his administration’s plans to effectuate mass deportations, increased detentions, and indiscriminate raids. For the past three years, Governor Greg Abbott has used Texas as a laboratory for these types of policies through Operation Lone Star (OLS). This resource aims to parallel the national moves on enforcement to what has already taken place in Texas, in hopes to better equip community members and advocates with the framework to fight back.
Eligibility for U Nonimmigrant Status, commonly known as the “U Visa,” hinges on whether the applicant has been the “victim” of a qualifying crime. The regulations implementing the U visa statute contemplate three categories of “victims” who may qualify for the U visa: direct, bystander, and indirect victims. This practice advisory provides a basic overview of the requirements for U nonimmigrant eligibility. It then discusses the definition of “victim” and three different ways to qualify as a victim for purposes of U visa eligibility. Finally, it addresses derivative eligibility for qualifying family members.
Thanks to the years of community advocacy, the Harris County Sheriff’s Office (HCSO) will now accept the Harris County ELC, as a secondary identity document. This policy is effective as of August 19, 2024 and is only applicable to the HCSO. Training of HCSO officers and staff on the policy change is unclear. Other law enforcement agencies in Houston and Harris County do not currently accept the ELC as a form of identification (ID).
On January 20, 2025, Donald Trump issued more than a dozen Executive Orders (EOs) that seek to sow fear in immigrant communities. These orders seek to militarize our borders and immigration enforcement more broadly, massively expand the existing deportation and detention machinery, punish organizations that care for immigrants as well as local governments that prioritize protecting their residents, and misinterpret the U.S. Constitution and immigration laws. They attempt to do everything from effectively ending asylum and birthright citizenship to teeing up immigration bans and expansive indefinite detention. They are steeped in white supremacist ideology and criminalizing narratives about immigrants. Together, the EOs create a web of entanglement among immigration, military and criminal law enforcement at federal, state, and local levels. This document outlines portions of the EOs that use contact with the criminal system and immigration detention to further criminalize, detain and deport immigrants.
These forms aim to support DACA recipients living in Texas establish an LLC to continue earning a living outside of the confines of the program.
These forms aim to support DACA recipients living in New York establish an LLC to continue earning a living outside of the confines of the program.
These forms aim to support DACA recipients living in Michigan establish an LLC to continue earning a living outside of the confines of the program.
These forms aim to support DACA recipients living in Illinois establish an LLC to continue earning a living outside of the confines of the program.
These forms aim to support DACA recipients living in California establish an LLC to continue earning a living outside of the confines of the program.
When the first Trump administration took office in 2017, it immediately adopted restrictive policies on asylum, making it more difficult for asylum seekers to win their cases. Trump returning to office in January 2025 raises fears that asylum-seekers will once again be a focus of the administration’s anti-immigrant policies. Although the new administration will likely enact policies that are harmful to asylum seekers, certain changes would require Congressional action. Moreover, executive actions on asylum could be challenged in court. This alert explores what a second Trump term could mean for asylum seekers and what the administration can, and cannot, change on its own.
Given the previous Trump administration’s use of public charge as a means to limit access to immigration benefits, many may be facing renewed anxiety about public charge. This resource aims to provide advocates and community members with an understanding of what public charge changes are—and are not—possible under a second Trump administration, including timing of any possible changes and recommendations for community members.