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
892 resources 24 sources 826 direct files
Common starting points
Immigration court deadline 606 Asylum merits package 93 Motions, stays, and pretermission 133 Bond, detention, and habeas 79 BIA, PFR, and federal court 447 USCIS and AAO appeals 209 Crim-imm screening 151 VAWA, U, T, and survivor relief 190
Topic: Removal defense Clear Workflow: BIA, PFR, and federal court Clear

Results

Showing 1-12 of 132 resources.

Sorted by Newest first
National Immigration Project Practice advisory Mar 13, 2026

Stays of Removal

A stay of removal prevents the Department of Homeland Security from executing a final order of removal against a person. DHS, immigration judges, the Board of Immigration Appeals, and the U.S. courts of appeals all have the authority to grant stays of removal. If a stay of removal is in effect, DHS may not remove the person from the United States. This practice advisory explains how to seek a court-ordered stay of removal with an IJ, the BIA, and the U.S. courts of appeals, and how to seek an ad

Removal defense BIA appeals Immigration court BIA 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
NIWAP Library Amicus brief Feb 1, 2026

Nvart Idinyan (formerly Nvart Huckfeldt) (August 9 2005) Board of Immigration Appeals

Nvart Idinyan (formerly Nvart Huckfeldt) (August 9 2005) Board of Immigration Appeals. The National Network to End Violence Against Immigrant Women, represented by Crowell and Moring, filed this amicus in support of the immigration judge’s finding that plaintiff qualified for cancellation of removal under VAWA and refuting DHS assertion that once a victim reached a “safe house” she should no longer have access to VAWA provisions. (Crowell and Moring, Pro Bono)

Removal defense BIA appeals VAWA / U / T Immigration court BIA Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record
NIWAP Library Amicus brief Feb 1, 2026

Perales v. Ashcroft, (2003) U.S. Court of Appeals 10th Circuit

Perales-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)

Removal defense BIA appeals Federal court BIA Court of appeals 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 Jul 25, 2025

Fighting for a Day in Court: Understanding and Responding to Pretermission of Asylum Applications

Immigration Judges have increasingly begun to pretermit asylum applications--often ordering asylum seekers removed without ever having a chance to have a hearing on their claims. This Practice Advisory (PA) discusses a recent Policy Memo by the Executive Office for Immigration Review Acting Director and a recent Board of Immigration Appeals decision, which have prompted judges to pretermit cases. The PA also contains practical tips on how to fight this practice.

Asylum Removal defense BIA appeals Immigration court BIA Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record
Immigrant Legal Resource Center Template motion Jul 1, 2025

Responding to DHS Motions to Recalendar

In recent months, the Department of Homeland Security has begun filing thousands of motions to recalendar administratively closed proceedings. This trend is raising questions about how attorneys and accredited representatives can respond to these motions and protect their clients’ interests, particularly in cases that have been administratively closed for many years. This advisory explores those questions and offers strategy considerations when determining how to proceed in each case.

Removal defense Immigration court BIA Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record
NIWAP Library Amicus brief Jun 18, 2025

Aylaliya Assefa Birru v. Barr

Aylaliya Assefa Birru v. Barr (January 11 2021) 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. NIWAP, represented by Baker McKenzie, is lead amicus in a brief on behalf of an immigrant domestic violence victim who is seeking relief under the Violence Against Women Act’s domestic violence victim waiver in her VAWA cancellation of removal case. The Board of Immigration Appeals and the immigration judge denied her the ability to present evidence of waiver eligibility.

Removal defense VAWA / U / T Immigration court BIA Direct PDF
Direct PDF Source page Record