Practice resources
Search immigration practice advisories, sample filings, manuals, brief banks, and government guidance from trusted practitioner sources.
Call and message your members of Congress telling them to oppose any effort to give ICE and Border Patrol more funding.
A stay of removal prevents the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from deporting a noncitizen from the United States while they continue to challenge their removal order or pursue an immigration benefit or humanitarian protection. This practice advisory discusses the law, procedure, and practical tips for seeking a stay of removal from DHS, immigration judges, the Board of Immigration Appeals, and the U.S. courts of appeals.
This practice advisory, along with the accompanying report, Bias in the Criminal Legal System: A Report Aggregating Social Science Research and Reporting on Racial Bias in the Criminal Legal System, and template brief , provides a framework for you to make legal arguments and introduce evidence during your client’s immigration court proceedings if they are seeking discretionary relief or requesting bond. You can use this advisory and the accompanying report to argue that the immigration judge sh
Call and message your members of Congress telling them to oppose any effort to give ICE and Border Patrol more funding.
This practice advisory discusses the law, procedure, and practical tips for seeking a stay of removal from DHS, immigration judges, the Board of Immigration Appeals, and the U.S. courts of appeals.
United States v. State of Arizona and Janice K. Brewer Governor, United States Court of Appeals for the 9trh Circuit. (2010) Submitted an amicus brief in the 9th Circuit case in support of the United States position that Arizona law SB 1070 unconstitutionally interferes with federal immigration laws designed to help immigrant victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, human trafficking and other crimes. It undermines federal laws guaranteeing that all persons in the United States have access
Friendly House Et Al., V. Michael B. Whiting Et Al., United States District Court Arizona, (2010) Recruited by the ACLU, MALDEF, The National Immigration Law Center and the Asian Pacific American Legal Center to organize a women’s perspective amicus in support of plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction to stop implementation of key portions of Arizona’s anti-immigrant legislation SB 1070. Legal Momentum also assisted in identifying immigrant victim plaintiff’s for this lawsuit. 83 women’
Gabriel Perez Cruz v. Barr (2020) U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit. NIWAP assisted the Family Violence Appellate Project in California in developing, securing social science support for and national sign ons from 16 organizations nationally for this 9th Circuit Amicus Brief in which we were represented by Haney and Boone LLP. The brief discussed the mental health impact of domestic violence and coercive control in abusive relationships and perpetrators who coerce their victims into committing c
Esteban Cabezas (2010) Appeal to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Administrative Appeals Office. Amicus submitted by Legal Momentum, National Network to End Violence Against Immigrant Women, and represented by Andrew Taylor, of a denial of a VAWA self-petition by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Vermont Service Center. This case raises important issues about the any credible evidence standard to be applied in VAWA self-petitioning cases and on immigra
This is the second part of a two-part practice advisory on how to effectively challenge an immigration judge's adverse credibility finding with the Board of Immigration Appeals. The two advisories should be read together, as neither part is complete on its own. This second part of the advisory discusses how to challenge adverse credibility findings based on a witness's demeanor or responsiveness; findings that are based on an immigration judge's speculation and conjecture, particularly regarding
This is the first part of a two-part practice advisory on how to effectively challenge an immigration judge's adverse credibility finding with the Board of Immigration Appeals. The advisory guides practitioners on what constitutes a proper adverse credibility finding and what to do if the finding is unclear or improper. It then specifically identifies the most common bases for adverse credibility findings, with practical advice on how to challenge each type of finding per current case law.
EOIR manual explaining the procedures for electronic filing through EOIR’s Courts & Appeals System (ECAS). Last updated September 25, 2022.