BIA Edge

Practice resources

Practice resources

Immigration Practice Resources

Search immigration practice advisories, sample filings, manuals, brief banks, and government guidance from trusted practitioner sources.

More filters
Clear all
918 resources 24 sources 848 direct files
Common starting points
Immigration court deadline 624 Asylum merits package 95 Motions, stays, and pretermission 139 Bond, detention, and habeas 85 BIA, PFR, and federal court 466 USCIS and AAO appeals 214 Crim-imm screening 158 VAWA, U, T, and survivor relief 197
Type: Practice advisory Clear Topic: Federal court Clear

Results

Showing 1-12 of 82 resources.

Sorted by Newest first
National Immigration Project Practice advisory Aug 4, 2026

Sosnava Rodriguez v. Ortega and 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) Detention in the Fifth Circuit

This practice alert explains the holding of the now-vacated decision on the merits from a panel of the Fifth Circuit in Sosnava Rodriguez v. Ortega , No. 26-50183, and collects caselaw in which district judges have granted habeas relief despite the Fifth Circuit’s recent decisions to vacate the panel’s merits decision and enter a stay of the district court orders pending en banc review.

Detention / bond Federal court Federal district court Court of appeals Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record
Immigrant Legal Resource Center Practice advisory Apr 2, 2026

Challenging EOIR Bond Denials in Federal Court

When an immigration judge denies bond based on a finding that a person is a danger to the community or a flight risk, what options remain to challenge that decision? As immigration detention expands and bond denials become increasingly common, federal court litigation is emerging as a critical tool to obtain judicial review of these determinations.

Detention / bond Federal court Immigration court Court of appeals Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record
American Immigration Council Practice advisory Mar 13, 2026

Electronic Filing and Access to Electronic Federal Court Documents

This Practice Advisory explains the federal rules authorizing electronic filing in federal court; describes how to file documents in federal court using the Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) System; and outlines how to access electronic documents through Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER). The Advisory discusses restrictions on electronic access to court documents in immigration cases.

Federal court Cross-forum Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record
National Immigration Project Practice advisory Feb 23, 2026

Habeas in the Fifth Circuit After Buenrostro

Analysis of Buenrostro-Mendez and its effect on detention under 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(2)(A), with practical implications for habeas strategy in the Fifth Circuit.

Detention / bond Federal court Removal defense Federal district court Court of appeals Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record
National Immigration Project Practice advisory Feb 23, 2026

Habeas in the Fifth Circuit After Buenrostro

On February 6, 2026, the Fifth Circuit issued Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi , No. 25-cv-20496, 2026 WL 323330 (5th Cir. Feb. 6, 2026), a split decision with a strong dissent in which the Fifth Circuit sided with DHS and the BIA to determine that all noncitizens who are present in the United States without lawful admission are subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) during removal proceedings, rather than discretionary detention under § 1226(a). Despite Buenrostro , habeas opti

Removal defense Detention / bond BIA appeals BIA Federal district court Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record
National Immigration Project Practice advisory Jan 13, 2026

Quick Guide to Release from Immigration Detention for SIJS Youth

IMPORTANT: On February 6, 2026, the Fifth Circuit ruled in Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi , No. 25-20496, that noncitizens in removal proceedings who have not been admitted are subject to "mandatory" detention under 8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(2)(A). This resource has not been updated since the Buenrostro decision. If you are filing a habeas petition in a district within the Fifth Circuit, you will need to adapt your legal claims in light of the Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi decision, e.g. by focusing on constitu

Removal defense Detention / bond Federal court Immigration court Federal district court Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record
National Immigration Project Practice advisory Oct 3, 2025

Practice Alert: Guidance on CHIRLA v. Noem Order (Expedited Removal)

On September 12, 2025, the D.C. Circuit denied the government’s motion for a stay pending appeal, dissolved its temporary, partial administrative stay, and fully restored the district court’s August 1 order in CHIRLA v. Noem , a lawsuit challenging Trump 2.0 government directives applying expedited removal to paroled individuals. The August 1 order, which is now fully in effect, stays policies that allowed DHS to put individuals who were previously paroled into the United States at a port of ent

Removal defense Detention / bond BIA appeals BIA Federal district court Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record
National Immigration Project Practice advisory Aug 27, 2025

O.C.V. v. Bondi: Tenth Circuit Vacates Matter of M-R-M-S-

On August 26, 2025, the Tenth Circuit issued a published decision, O.C.V. v. Bondi , vacating the Board of Immigration Appeals presidential decision Matter of M-R-M-S- , which had wrongfully held that if a persecutor had any motivation other than animus toward the family group, an asylum seeker could not prevail on a family-based asylum claim. The Tenth Circuit rejected this narrowed definition of nexus. The case was litigated in federal court by the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies and the

Asylum Detention / bond Family-based practice BIA Court of appeals Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record
American Immigration Council Practice advisory Jan 15, 2025

Judicial Review of Visa Decisions After the Supreme Court’s Decision in Department of State v. Muñoz

In Department of State v. Muñoz , 602 U.S. 899 (2024), the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that a U.S. citizen and her noncitizen spouse had no access to judicial review of a consular officer’s denial of an immigrant visa. The Court held that a U.S. citizen has no “fundamental liberty interest” i n her spouse’s admission to the United States. This practice advisory, by the American Immigration Council, the International Refugee Assistance Project, and the Consular Accountability Project, is intende

Asylum Removal defense Family-based practice Court of appeals Consular processing Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record
National Immigration Project Practice advisory Jan 10, 2025

Challenging U.S. Passport and N-600 Denials under 8 U.S.C. § 1503

8 U.S.C. § 1503 provides pathways for individuals who were denied a right or privilege of nationality to challenge such denials in federal district court and obtain a declaratory judgment that they are indeed a citizen or national of the United States—by birth, naturalization, or derivative citizenship. These claims generally arise in the context of a passport denial or revocation, or a revocation or denial of a request for a certificate of citizenship (N-600). This practice advisory discusses t

Naturalization Federal court Federal district court Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record
National Immigration Project Practice advisory Dec 18, 2024

Practice Alert: J.O.P. v. DHS Settlement

On November 25, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland granted final approval of a settlement agreement reached by the parties in J.O.P. v. DHS , No. 8:19-CV01944-SAG (D. Md.). The settlement agreement is the culmination of a class action lawsuit pending over five years. This practice alert highlights key points about the agreement that immigration practitioners representing asylum seekers need to know. You can read the full agreement and learn more about the J.O.P. case by v

Asylum Federal court Federal district court Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record