Practice resources
Search immigration practice advisories, sample filings, manuals, brief banks, and government guidance from trusted practitioner sources.
ASISTA Practice Alert: What Just Happened in Matter of Ibarra-Vega? (March 11, 2026) from ASISTA.
Frequently 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.
The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board), the U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the Supreme Court have issued many decisions in the past year that implicate the rights of noncitizens. This resource is designed to help immigration practitioners familiar with the categorical approach stay current on significant case law developments over the past year at the intersection of immigration and criminal law. This resource begins with an overview of notable case law developments before the BIA, the U.S
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.
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
On January 13, 2026, the Ninth Circuit issued an en banc decision holding that a violation of California Penal Code § 245(a)(1) (assault with a deadly weapon) is not a crime of violence. United States v. Gomez, No. 23-435 (9th Cir., Jan. 13, 2026) (en banc). After this decision, no conviction for PC § 245(a)(1) can be an aggravated felony. For criminal defenders, the best practice is to avoid a PC § 245(a)(1) conviction until the timeline for certiorari on Gomez has expired—the ninety-day period
This Amicus Brief was filed by Crowell and Moring on behalf of the NIWAP, Inc and the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence in the 3rd Circuit Federal Court of Appeals. The brief was filed in support for a mother of a domestic violence victim from Honduras who interceded to protect her daughter who was experiencing domestic violence and was stalked and threatened by her daughter’s abuser. The Honduran mother had helped her daughter escape from a domestic violence perpetrator who had t
Arkansas 2015 U and T visa certification law requiring that each law enforcement agency in the state adopt a policy for the completion and signing of T and U certifications within 30 days of receiving the request.
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)
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)
Call and message your members of Congress telling them to oppose any effort to give ICE and Border Patrol more funding.
Human Rights First practice advisory describing possible bases for pretermission in immigration court and explaining how to prepare for, and respond to, motions to pretermit a client’s asylum claim. Last updated on January 23, 2026.