Practice Advisories & Brief Bank
Public immigration practice advisories, sample briefs, template motions, amicus briefs, and government guidance, organized in one searchable index and linked to the original host.
Filters
| Resource | Source | Topics | Date | Links |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Practice Advisory: Federal Tort Claims Act Frequently Asked Questions for AttorneysFrequently asked questions for attorneys representing immigrant clients on the Federal Tort Claims Act, sovereign-immunity waiver, administrative exhaustion, and damages claims against the federal government. Why it matters: Useful when immigration detention or enforcement facts may support a parallel damages analysis and you need a quick framework for screening an FTCA path. |
National Immigration Project National Direct PDF available |
Federal court
Removal defense
Detention / bond
Federal district court
Cross-forum
|
Mar 3, 2026 | |
Habeas in the Fifth Circuit After BuenrostroAnalysis 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. Why it matters: One of the better current detention items for Fifth Circuit practitioners because it turns a fast-moving appellate decision into concrete habeas strategy. |
National Immigration Project 5th Circuit Direct PDF available |
Detention / bond
Federal court
Removal defense
Federal district court
Court of appeals
|
Feb 23, 2026 | |
Perales v. Ashcroft, (2003) U.S. Court of Appeals 10th CircuitPerales-Cumpean, A76 386 969, Board of Immigration Appeals (2001), U.S. Court of Appeals 10th Circuit (2003). Amicus brief discussing the any credible evidence standard and the definition of battery or extreme cruelty in an immigrant rape and domestic violence victim’s Violence Against Women Act suspension of deportation case (National immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild, BIA, Arnold and Porter, Pro Bono 10th Circuit) Why it matters: Useful as an amicus or advocacy example on Removal Defense; confirm the cited authority and procedural posture before adapting it. |
NIWAP Library 10th Circuit Direct PDF available |
Removal defense
BIA appeals
Federal court
VAWA / U / T
BIA
Court of appeals
|
Feb 1, 2026 | |
Judicial Review of Visa Decisions After the Supreme Court’s Decision in Department of State v. MuñozIn 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 Why it matters: Useful as a practitioner-oriented overview from American Immigration Council on Asylum; review the source material for the most current authority and procedure. |
American Immigration Council National Direct PDF available |
Asylum
Removal defense
Family-based practice
Federal court
Consular practice
VAWA / U / T
Entry and admission
Court of appeals
Consular processing
|
Jan 15, 2025 | |
he Federal District Court granted Ms. Soto Alvarado’s MotionIn a case brought in Federal District Court in Rhode Island an abused spouse whose VAWA self-petition had been approved challenged USCIS’s revocation of her approved petition. The self-petitioner was divorced from her abuser and remarried after filing the self-petition but before the self-petition had been approved. The court’s ruling allows the self-petitioner to fully litigate her challenge the USCIS’s revocation of her self-petition due to remarriage in Federal District Court. The court’s rul Why it matters: Useful as an amicus or advocacy example on Removal Defense; confirm the cited authority and procedural posture before adapting it. |
NIWAP Library National Direct PDF available |
Removal defense
Federal court
VAWA / U / T
USCIS
Federal district court
|
Jun 15, 2024 | |
Federal Preemption in Immigration LawFriendly House Et Al., V. Michael B. Whiting Et Al ., (June 11, 2010) United States District Court Arizona. Legal Momentum, recruited by the ACLU, MALDEF, The National Immigration Law Center, and the Asian Pacific American Legal Center (represented by Manatt, Phelps, and Phillips) to organize a brief articulating immigrant 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 Why it matters: Useful as a source-specific directory when you want a quick way to browse Removal Defense materials without searching the entire site. |
NIWAP Library National |
Removal defense
Federal court
Federal district court
|
Apr 25, 2024 | |
Special Immigrant Juvenile StatusGuardianship of S.H.R. v. Jesus Rivas (March 21, 2022; August 15, 2022) Supreme Court of California. NIWAP, represented by Manatt, Phelps and Phillips, filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court of California in a case in which the Court of Appeals wrongly denied an SIJS eligible child SIJS predicate findings. The amicus brief detailed the legislative and regulatory history of Special Immigrant Juvenile Status and discussed how the approach taken by the Court of Appeals directly contradicts this Why it matters: Useful as a source-specific directory when you want a quick way to browse BIA Appeals materials without searching the entire site. |
NIWAP Library National Direct PDF available |
BIA appeals
Federal court
Special immigrant
Children and SIJS
Immigration court
BIA
Court of appeals
|
Apr 25, 2024 | |
Trauma, Testimony, and Adult VictimsGabriel Perez Cruz v. Barr , (July 2 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 com Why it matters: Useful as a source-specific directory when you want a quick way to browse Removal Defense materials without searching the entire site. |
NIWAP Library 9th Circuit |
Removal defense
Family-based practice
BIA appeals
Federal court
BIA
Court of appeals
|
Apr 25, 2024 | |
U VisaUnited States V. Luciana Moreno-Lopez ; (June 7 2010) United States District Court, Eastern District of Chattanooga. The National Network to End Violence Against Immigrant Women, among others, and represented by Dean Hill Rivkin, filed an amicus brief in a case in which undocumented workers had been victims of extortion, when the workers complained to EEOC and the Department of Labor the employer retaliated by triggering the employees detention by the Department of Homeland Security. The workers Why it matters: Useful as a source-specific directory when you want a quick way to browse Detention / Bond materials without searching the entire site. |
NIWAP Library National |
Detention / bond
Federal court
Consular practice
VAWA / U / T
Federal district court
|
Apr 25, 2024 | |
VAWA ConfidentialityHawke v. Department of Homeland Security , (May 23 2008) United States District Court for the District of Northern California. Legal Momentum, represented by Morgan and Lewis submitted this amicus brief discussing the history and purpose of VAWA Confidentiality created in 1996 (expanded in 2000 and 2005) as Section 384 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (“IIRIRA”). In this case of first impression, the Court clarified that VAWA confidentiality provisions p Why it matters: Useful as a source-specific directory when you want a quick way to browse Federal Court materials without searching the entire site. |
NIWAP Library National |
Federal court
VAWA / U / T
Federal district court
|
Apr 25, 2024 | |
Litigation for Business Immigration PractitionersThis Practice Advisory has information practitioners need to assess whether filing suit in federal court is the right option for challenging an employment-based petition denial. Why it matters: Useful as a practitioner-oriented overview from American Immigration Council on Employment; review the source material for the most current authority and procedure. |
American Immigration Council National Direct PDF available |
Employment
Federal court
Cross-forum
|
Jan 8, 2024 | |
Common Tools of Statutory Construction for Criminal Removal GroundsThis practice advisory describes some of the common tools of statutory construction to assist practitioners in advocating for narrow definitions of generic criminal removal grounds before the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) and the U.S. courts of appeals. To determine whether a criminal conviction renders a noncitizen removable under federal immigration law, federal courts and the BIA generally employ the categorical approach. Under this approach, adjudicators consider whether the elements of Why it matters: Useful as a practitioner-oriented overview from American Immigration Council on Removal Defense; review the source material for the most current authority and procedure. |
American Immigration Council National Direct PDF available |
Removal defense
Crimes and categorical approach
BIA appeals
Federal court
BIA
|
Nov 28, 2023 |