Practice Alerts are provided courtesy of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), American Immigration Council and other immigrants' rights organizations. An archive of alerts are listed by month in the practice alerts section of the library.

1-10 of 46

Asylum Eligibility and Procedural Modifications: Interim Final Rule / Request for Comments

  • By: US Department of "Justice"
  • Date: 07/16/19

DOJ and DHS are amending their respective regulations to provide that, with limited exceptions, an alien who enters or attempts to enter the United States across the southern border after failing to apply for protection in a third country outside the alien's country of citizenship, nationality, or last lawful habitual residence through which the alien transited en route to the United States is ineligible for asylum.

Effective July 16, 2019. Written or electronic comments must be submitted on or before August 15, 2019.

A Guide to Assisting Asylum Seekers with In Absentia Removal Orders

  • By: CLINIC and Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project
  • Date: 07/11/19

Motions to Rescind and Reopen (MTRR) and Motions to Reopen (MTR)5 are critical tools for assisting families who have received in absentia removal orders. This guide provides a comprehensive overview of whether and how to file an MTRR and/or MTR in these cases

Two New Practice Advisories on Matter of A-B-

  • By: Center for Gender and Refugee Studies
  • Date: 07/09/19

One Year After Matter of A-B-:  Chapter I: Post-Matter of A-B- Adjudication Observations  on the adjudication of domestic and gang violence claims at the courts of appeals, BIA, immigration court, and asylum office; and Chapter II: Compendium of Court of Appeals Decisions Referencing Matter of A-B- summarizes every published and unpublished court of appeals decision citing to A-B- through June 30, 2019.
Challenging Matter of A-B- in the Courts of Appeals: Administrative Law Arguments contains practical guidance and detailed outlines of suggested arguments to challenge the validity of A-B- in petitions for review.

To request copies of these resources, or to receive additional assistance with your case, please fill out CGRS’s technical assistance request form.

Constitutional Challenges to Mandatory Immigration Detention

  • By: ACLU and Asian Americans Advancing Justice - LA
  • Date: 07/06/19

In Nielsen v. Preap, 139 S. Ct. 954 (2019), the Supreme Court held that the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”), 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c), imposes mandatory detention on a noncitizen subject to a criminal ground of removal—regardless of when U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) takes him or her into custody. Thus, the statute authorizes ICE to impose mandatory detention any time after an individual’s predicate criminal offense—even if that person committed that offense years or decades in the past, and has long since returned to the community and rehabilitated themselves.


Critically, however, Preap reserved the question of whether the Constitution prohibits mandatory detention based on temporally distant offenses. See Preap, 139 S. Ct. at 972. Thus, an individual may still pursue as-applied due process challenges to mandatory detention based solely on past offenses through an individual habeas petition in federal district court. In many cases, there are strong arguments that such mandatory detention violates the Due Process Clause.

Matter of Zhang, 27 I&N Dec. 569 (BIA 2019)

  • By: Board of Immigration Appeals
  • Date: 07/02/19

Under the plain language of section 237(a)(3)(D)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(3)(D)(i) (2012), it is not necessary to show intent to establish that an alien is deportable for making a false representation of United States citizenship.

Changing Patterns of Interior Immigration Enforcement in the United States, 2016 -2018

  • By: American Immigration Council
  • Date: 07/01/19

To better understand the changing interior enforcement trends under the Trump administration, this report analyzes individual-level data on immigration enforcement outcomes obtained from ICE by the American Immigration Council through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation (“ICE Data”). They examined interior immigration enforcement through three key enforcement events: ICE encounters, ICE arrests, and removals

Recent Decisions on the Notice to Appear

  • By: CLINIC and Immigration Advocates Network
  • Date: 06/28/19

This is a podcast discussion with Victoria Neilson on recent decisions by the BIA, federal courts, and the Supreme Court, on the Notice to Appear.

Know Your Rights Videos

  • By: ACLU and Brooklyn Defender Services
  • Date: 06/27/19

High quality, plain language graphic videos on individual rights in the home, at work, and in a vehicle.  Translated into seven languages.

Recursos para Solicitantes de Asilo

  • By: Asylum Seekers Advocacy Project
  • Date: 06/27/19

El Proyecto de Apoyo para Solicitantes de Asilo (PASA) ha creado y reunido varios recursos para personas solicitando asilo en la corte de inmigración que no tienen abogado.

ICE Focus Shifts Away from Detaining Serious Criminals

  • By: TRAC
  • Date: 06/25/19

As of December 31, 2018, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had 47,486 individuals in its custody. The number of ICE detainees was up 22 percent from the 38,810 persons ICE held at the end of September 2016. Results are based on case-by-case records recently obtained and analyzed by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University.

The most striking change over this 27-month period was a dramatic drop in the number of individuals held who had committed serious crimes. Despite the increasing number of individuals ICE detained, fewer and fewer immigrants convicted of serious felonies were arrested and held in custody by the agency. Their numbers had dropped by over twelve hundred (-1,253), while total ICE detainees ballooned by over eighty-six hundred (8,676) during the same period. Immigrants who had never been convicted of even a minor violation shot up 39 percent.

1-10 of 46