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 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.
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
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
In February 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice published an Interim Final Rule (IFR), entitled “Appellate Procedures for the Board of Immigration Appeals.” The IFR made sweeping procedural changes to Executive Office for Immigration Review regulations that relate to appeals filed before the Board of Immigration Appeals. The rule’s effective date was March 9, 2026. Fortunately, several provisions of the IFR are not currently in effect due to a court order finding them legally invalid and partia
3rd Circuit PRECEDENTIAL OPINION Cardenas v Attorney General (March 31, 2026) [pdf] Published March 31, 2026 Topics: Amicus Briefs , VAWA Self-Petition
NIWAP was lead amicus joined by Legal Momentum and the Tahirih Justice Center on a brief submitted to the Third Circuit prepared by the law firm Haynes and Boone. Under VAWA and U.S.C. § 1367, the amici argued that abused immigrant children and stepchildren are entitled to protections regardless of when their abuser obtained lawful permanent residency status. The Amicus Brief urged the 3rd Circuit to reject the Board of Immigration Appeals’ reliance on the Matter of L-L-P, which imposed a timing
This supplemental letter requested by the 3rd Circuit from the parties addressed the following issues: 1) An applicant for cancellation of removal need not show continuing abuse at the time of the application under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(2)(A)(i)(II) and (2) The Court can, but should not, consider this issue without remand.
On June 3, 2026, a federal district court in California entered a final judgment in the East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump , vacated the Circumvention of Lawful Pathway (“CLP”) rule, codified at 8 C.F.R. § 1208.33 et seq. The vacatur means that the CLP rule has been set aside and is without legal effect unless and until the ruling is stayed, modified, or reversed on appeal. As a result, noncitizens whose asylum applications were denied solely because of the CLP rule—but who were otherwise foun