Practice resources
Search immigration practice advisories, sample filings, manuals, brief banks, and government guidance from trusted practitioner sources.
ASISTA Practice Alert: 2026 Updates to USCIS Signature Policy (September 3, 2026) from ASISTA.
On August 13, 2026, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) issued a decision on Matter of Delcarmen-Lara , that overruled Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly and held that travel on advance parole is now a "departure" for purposes of the unlawful presence bars at INA § 212(a)(9)(B)(i). Under this new interpretation, a person who has accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence and then leaves the United States on advance parole will trigger the 3- or 10-year bar to admissibility. The BIA appli
On July 28, 2026, the Ninth Circuit ruled that Cal. Pen. Code § 273.5 is not a crime of violence. This practice advisory discusses the reasoning of the decision and provides advice on next steps for removal defense practitioners and criminal defenders representing noncitizens.
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.
The end of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) means that people who the Department of Homeland Security previously determined warranted protection from removal and work authorization now face the possibility of detention and removal. This practice advisory equips practitioners with tools to identify options for people losing TPS, including potential immigration benefits through USCIS, employment-based opportunities in Canada, protection from removal in immigration court, and strategies to safeguar
This step-by-step guide will walk you through the steps for filing your first petition for habeas corpus (immigration) in the Central District of California. The guide provides helpful tips and how-tos from registering for PACER, the federal court electronic filing system, to applying for admission to the district bar, to formatting and filing your petition and motion for injunctive relief. The guide includes helpful screenshots and references to the local rules, as well as links to other useful
The Ninth Circuit issued a decision in Eskilian v. Bondi , 172 F.4th 682 (9th Cir. 2026) on April 2, 2026. This case can guide advocates on demonstrating due diligence for equitable tolling for an otherwise time- or number-barred Motion to Reopen. This analysis could be particularly helpful for clients from countries that previously did not accept individuals deported from the U.S., such as Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam, as well as those from former Soviet countries.
On June 23, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision in Blanche v. Lau , in which it held that a border officer can determine that a lawful permanent resident (LPR) returning to the United States after a trip abroad is an applicant for admission based on the commission of a crime, even without clear and convincing evidence to support that finding. Mr. Lau, an LPR, traveled abroad while a criminal charge was pending against him for a potential crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT). Eve
On June 23, 2026, the Supreme Court issued an opinion in Blanche v. Lau, No. 25-429, holding that border agents do not need clear and convincing evidence that a lawful permanent resident (“LPR”) returning to the United States after travel is “seeking an admission” under Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) § 101(a)(13)(C)(v) at the point of encounter in order for the government to charge that person with inadmissibility in removal proceedings. The majority opinion leaves many open questions,
ASISTA Practice Advisory: Screening Victims of Notario Fraud and Unscrupulous Representation for U Visa Qualifying Crimes (July 2026) from ASISTA.
For many detained noncitizens, the ability to marry is significant not only because it implicates a fundamental personal and legal right, but also because a valid marriage may establish eligibility for certain forms of immigration relief or benefits that may ultimately lead to release from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention. Despite the importance of this right, individuals in ICE custody often face substantial procedural and logistical barriers when attempting to marry, la
This advisory is part II of a two-part advisory on the federal immigration consequences of California Proposition 36 enacted in December 2024. Part I on Prop 36 and controlled substance offenses is found here . Part II discusses the immigration consequences of a conviction for a property crime or property crime enhancement under Prop 36, specifically new Cal. Penal Code § 666.1 and § 490.3 and new enhancements under Cal. Penal Code § 12022.6 and § 12022.65. This advisory outlines criminal defens