Immigration Practice Resources
Search immigration practice advisories, sample filings, manuals, brief banks, and government guidance from trusted practitioner sources.
DVD v. DHS: Practice Alert
C������c�����k�q�.bİ �4�2h���i a��ca& �� ��D�� ���� �rP��f���K9�W$�xRn�������D֯N�؛L辄h ؈N��Jӌ�"�g �&D���� �P�}3�pS\(e�^>&��C� gQ(e|~�IU�<"����� Hh� � m�,�a�:�� W.��>ܜ� Ϝ� �N����uג���y�k�� >���f��l�ɥ`�2@�P�.k�LKF���X����9����_q�1��x��7��Y��,x�"�^��LY�� ������op �aHL������Ț�Yq��3��s��hu(�.Mݩm��e�W�M�O������&������9 �s;�ᅳBb��?���S-=����#ޕ�-�E��N�ݓ�J���n D�Oi!ag~ Y�;��lq��XW���gϻ� e�:;����W�3�vvA���?���=9�V���� �G�L��^J�&qC�c�F����RK+� K�k� �K�h���/ҥ)
Gomez v. Jaddou: Practice Advisory
%PDF-1.6 %���� 278 0 obj <> endobj 306 0 obj <>/Filter/FlateDecode/ID[<400065CB7A97644E90C1E65962CAA2CC> ]/Index[278 58]/Info 277 0 R/Length 129/Prev 257507/Root 279 0 R/Size 336/Type/XRef/W[1 3 1]>>stream h�bbd```b``���3�d?�d�"�����`�z�Q� & �j��j���0� L ��/��*�W�H�� 2LH2�o�=KA�/ 6C(�\Z�"%���x�������00j�?#�S������ endstream endobj startxref 0 %%EOF 335 0 obj <>stream h�b```�] � ,O�@��(���q�I������UF� �X� u6Xn���������2�&u�-����jg�x\8�|Mh�b�N)�� )����&s�.��a��U�H,c� A
IDP and NYU Immigrant Rights Clinic and Practice Advisory: Making Statutory Arguments in the Second Circuit on the Meaning of “When…Released” and “Released” in U.S.C. § 1226(c) To Challenge Mandatory Detention After Jennings and Lora
%PDF-1.7 %���� 1 0 obj <> endobj 2 0 obj <> endobj 3 0 obj <>/ExtGState<>/XObject<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageB/ImageC/ImageI] >>/MediaBox[ 0 0 612 792] /Contents 4 0 R/Group<>/Tabs/S>> endobj 4 0 obj <> stream x��\mo�F� �a?J��r��|9l�=$h�\�^Q��"�6�T�b��C��73��d��4��D� �gvvv�w�" B���H�"��$�DS�|��7�z�����o��B� ����� ׅB�(K�D�ƁJ�����U"�Zx���O���ϗ/�3bz���i�� �����~���w����/~� �t a�M�4P�@_IMa�E�� ��@ SӅq�[WJ���~�(p��q��,gwE&^��>��>5J�� �t~9Փ�7�S3��B49�������+��ǟ����� =��h '�̃�G� | ?
IDP Practice Advisory: Making Constitutional Arguments in the Second Circuit to Challenge Prolonged Mandatory Detention after Jennings and Lora
%PDF-1.7 %���� 1 0 obj <>/Metadata 325 0 R/ViewerPreferences 326 0 R>> endobj 2 0 obj <> endobj 3 0 obj <>/ExtGState<>/XObject<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageB/ImageC/ImageI] >>/MediaBox[ 0 0 612 792] /Contents 4 0 R/Group<>/Tabs/S/StructParents 0>> endobj 4 0 obj <> stream x��]�o�F� ��~1�}�Q;9$hr�ڽ�h�-���J��毿��%� W��u��������vv�^ao�t��E�1{{q��|�" #��q�"��L�U���/�`��o�^�x��3�qu����"ƙLE�5�uʔ]-�^&�v �[���_�|�� �ˮ>�|������ݧs�v��MP�$�P"���Fx��"R����,L���E0� �$GP��49����y�G�Xp&F
Immigration Judges’ Authority to Grant Release on Conditional Parole Under INA § 236(a) as an Alternative to Release on a Monetary Bond: Rivera v. Holder
%PDF-1.7 %���� 1139 0 obj <> endobj 1160 0 obj <>/Filter/FlateDecode/ID[ ]/Index[1139 37]/Info 1138 0 R/Length 95/Prev 2949561/Root 1140 0 R/Size 1176/Type/XRef/W[1 2 1]>>stream h�bbd``b`>�$� ��@�u)H,D���1�6 BD�I���� �h��,��|b �@� H,f`bdjb```������3@����L endstream endobj startxref 0 %%EOF 1175 0 obj <>stream h�b```�u � , B �ae`a��d`�I�8f�!$�Z9�����b6 V�f�r@����~@ă3�q�Cz���i�; �$#Xk���9HG�F2^v(Q]±�1���4� ��U�9�xfnؙ�?+�Y��-O3��m��|� 9I�c-�' �[!��:��?�d�Q���9
Immigration Justice Campaign – Sample Direct Examination
This chart contains sample questions and goals for a direct examination in Immigration Court based on a fictional client.
Issue-Spotting Finality Arguments in Immigration Practice: Checklist for Immigration Attorneys Representing Clients with Criminal Convictions in Affirmative Applications and Removal Proceedings
%PDF-1.7 %���� 1 0 obj <>/Metadata 147 0 R/ViewerPreferences 148 0 R>> endobj 2 0 obj <> endobj 3 0 obj <>/ExtGState<>/XObject<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageB/ImageC/ImageI] >>/MediaBox[ 0 0 612 792] /Contents 4 0 R/Group<>/Tabs/S/StructParents 0>> endobj 4 0 obj <> stream x��\�r�H}w��� a�-��҄�4mOxb����}σ ��6H4��?���y�J�\�_Re]�rNf���G٠罺�c5��/뺜�y~������c^du^緋���˲V��K��C_|;=���W�zB��~Ʃ'����_?����������+\��w�����I�"�� wS���X V�c�u�W�F-F�2`���I�,[��s<���,䋚�U� 2�:/ �f�N�SE]��
Mendez Rojas v. Wolf: Practice Advisory and FAQ for Practitioners
"�d���@�W��l�f�@߰�F�����Y�-�zjH&�����g��� U�:~�A�c!�0 ��7v���ܸ�'�� ['��M�S�mK�=`Mc'B �L{ˆm���%a�*2�i]<�&���M��� �l�ް��dy�!s��G-��2\�3+U+F����� �?��S���-�L[���{���af�������.w3���N�^ ��bf���������wǼ�T+5�ϼ�T+��[���J͑�����b��qw�G���ˎ �������U�M�t�cjW�ew Q���b��d�53��}zm2nV� *�{�y?2�P��aݮ��f��b�"�~�r¸����t�nAq��~)��7����m�Z�����dܦ-rRb�{�1Q �79ƭ�� Rb��$�Pps���qC3��5�j(�=m�y�C[�vv��ֿ��sG{��ak'��������&55�6~�1�5��,ְhu?hci��:�j{_��� �"���&��������c� � �L^ �$��#k��d ��
Model Immigration Court Filings in Support of Fictional Indigenous Asylum Claim
Model immigration court filings prepared by Human Rights First attorney Andrew Feinberg in January 2025. These model filings reflect some of the most common documents and motions an attorney will file in support of a client’s asylum case in immigration court. The materials are intended to be reviewed simultaneously, as part of a single fictional case for a Guatemalan indigenous asylum claim in removal proceedings in the Ninth Circuit. The documents consist of the following:
New York City New Detainer Law Discretion Law Chart and Practice Advisory
New York City New Detainer Law Discretion Law Chart and Practice Advisory from Immigrant Defense Project.
Nightingale v. USCIS: Practice Advisory
%PDF-1.6 %���� 407 0 obj <> endobj 434 0 obj <>/Filter/FlateDecode/ID[<54F58E26CD32E84E942EB12E7E9A2030> ]/Index[407 68]/Info 406 0 R/Length 126/Prev 316816/Root 408 0 R/Size 475/Type/XRef/W[1 3 1]>>stream h�bbd```b``���3�� ɱ�6�V�H& �H�d����A$�8��&���0�L>�!�@�q:X��; v�Q��l�0��w���O�00120��D�bÜ�����@����� endstream endobj startxref 0 %%EOF 474 0 obj <>stream h�b```�� � � B ce`a��qȠE����� OT��8|*�ba`����U+8���c �D�=��8��~�:�z��]}��e�>�S�MJ"�(_?m|�M�-������J2�X