NILA has added new publicly-available legal resources over the last few months. These includes: a comparison chart of current, enjoined, and proposed regulations, a practice alert on the settlement agreement in Padilla v. ICE related to delayed credible fear interviews, a listing of circuit court rules related to judicial stays of removal. Check out these […]
NILA in Action
NILA and Allies Urge Supreme Court to Compel DHS to Comply with Its Obligation to Provide Proper Notice of Immigration Hearings
NILA, in collaboration with Wilmer Hale and Building One Community—the Center for Immigration Opportunity, the Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project, the Immigrant Defense Project, Immigrant Legal Defense, the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, Pangea Legal Services, and the Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network, filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in Campos Chaves v.
NILA and the Constitutional Accountability Center (CAC) teamed up to file an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in Santos-Zacaria v. Garland. In that case, the Supreme Court will decide: (1) whether the exhaustion provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act is a claim processing rule, and subject to equitable exceptions, or a jurisdictional rule,
The CILA-NILA Partnership Offers Helpful Resources & Trainings for Representing Immigrant Youth in Federal Court
CILA, a project of the ABA’s Commission on Immigration, has partnered with the National Immigration Litigation Alliance (NILA) since 2020 to create many trainings and resources for advocates working with immigrant youth in federal courts. Covering a wide variety of topics and claims, these materials support practitioners by providing detailed trainings, sample pleadings, practice advisories,
In LaParra-DeLeon v. Garland, NILA submitted an amicus brief and reply brief in support of the petitioner, on behalf of itself and three other immigrants’ rights organizations. The case, a petition for review of published BIA decision Matter of LaParra, involved a notice to rescind an in absentia removal order based on lack of notice.
In DeCarvalho v. Garland, as part of NILA’s co-counseling program, we teamed up with Jen Klein of the Committee for Public Counsel Services on a petition for review. On November 17, 2021, the First Circuit held that an IJ erred by treating a drug distribution conviction as if it were a per se bar to
In James v. Garland, NILA teamed up with solo practitioner, Kira Gagarin, on her first petition for review. The case involved whether the BIA erred by failing to consider our client’s argument that notice of appeal, made while she was pro se, detained, and “during the frenzied first month of the COVID-19 outbreak,” should be
NILA, in collaboration with Perkins Coie and the National Immigrant Justice Center, filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in Patel v. Garland. In our brief, we explain how, if the Immigration and Nationality Act’s restriction on federal court review of certain discretionary decisions is read as stripping federal courts of jurisdiction over nondiscretionary,
On August 18, 2021, in Alvarez Espino v. USCIS, the U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont denied a motion to dismiss filed by Defendant U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in NILA’s challenge to the agency’s unreasonable delay in placing the plaintiffs on the U visa waiting list. The court concluded that discovery was
On July 20, 2021, in Vangala v. USCIS, a case litigated by NILA, NWIRP, and Van Der Hout LLP, a federal district court judge approved a final Settlement Agreement that provides relief to over 60,000 asylum and U visa applicants. Counsel for the plaintiffs prepared this FAQ explaining the terms of the Settlement Agreement and