Practice resources
Search immigration practice advisories, sample filings, manuals, brief banks, and government guidance from trusted practitioner sources.
This Practice Advisory offers a short introduction to habeas corpus, addressing when and how a petitioner may file a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the immigration context.
On May 11, 2005, the REAL ID Act was signed into law. This Act contains numerous provisions related to federal court review of immigration cases. This Practice Advisory discusses the provisions of the Act that pertain to judicial review of immigration decisions under the INA.
This Practice Advisory contains practical and legal suggestions for individuals seeking to return to the United States after they have prevailed on a petition for review or an administrative motion to reopen or reconsider to the immigration court or Board of Immigration Appeals.
This Practice Advisory addresses situations in which a court might excuse a late-filed petition for review and discusses other administrative and federal court options for remedying the failure to timely file a petition for review. The Advisory also provides an overview of 28 U.S.C. § 1631, which authorizes courts to transfer a case to cure a lack of jurisdiction when an action is filed in the wrong federal court.
This Practice Advisory provides an overview of the CSPA, its effective date, and its interpretation and implementation by USCIS, the U.S. Department of State, the Board of Immigration Appeals, and the courts.
This Practice Advisory presents a short introduction to the Criminal Justice Act (CJA), which authorizes U.S. district courts to appoint counsel to represent financially eligible individuals in habeas corpus actions brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
This Practice Advisory examines how the courts and the agencies apply the fugitive disentitlement doctrine which arises in the immigration context when courts of appeals use the doctrine to dismiss petitions for review and when government agencies invoke the doctrine to deny FOIA requests. This Practice Advisory examines how the courts and the agencies apply the doctrine in these contexts.
A noncitizen who is convicted of a “crime of domestic violence” is deportable. INA 237(a)(2)(E)(i), 8 USC 1227(a)(2)(E)(i). In Matter of H. Estrada the BIA reaffirmed that the categorical approach must be used to determine that the offense is a “crime of violence” under 18 USC § 16, but it held that the circumstance-specific approach can be used to determine whether the victim and defendant shared the required domestic relationship. Under that approach, the BIA found that ICE can use any reliabl
The BIA stated that Cal PC § 273a(b) is not a deportable crime of child abuse, in Matter of Mendoza-Osorio.
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia decision regarding Plaintiff’s (European Connections & Tours) challenge of IMBRA under the First and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution; specifically challenging the portions of the IMBRA statute relating to the disclosure of background information and the definition of International Marriage Brokers. Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s Complaint.
Challenging Detention Without a Bond Hearing Pending Removal Proceedings | American Civil Liberties Union Skip navigation Fact Sheet Challenging Detention Without a Bond Hearing Pending Removal Proceedings Document Date: November 6, 2015 Download document Download document Skip to PDF content Related Issues Immigrants' Rights Immigrants' Rights and Detention
This practice advisory contains practical and legal suggestions for individuals seeking to return to the United States after they have prevailed on a petition for review or a motion to reopen or reconsider to the immigration court or Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).