Enforcement

The United States has long-been a beacon of hope for individuals around the world seeking protection and refuge. Our immigration policies must continue to protect those who need it. Learn more about how America can continue to provide humanitarian protection to those in times of crisis.

Recent Features

FACT SHEET
U.S. Citizen Children Impacted by Immigration Enforcement

Deportations of parents and family members have serious consequences that affect children and extend to communities and the country as a whole.

READ MORE

FACT SHEET
Expedited Removal Explainer

Expedited removal is a process by which low-level immigration officers can quickly deport certain noncitizens who are undocumented or have committed fraud or misrepresentation. 

READ MORE

Detained, Deceived, and Deported: Experiences of Recently Deported Central American Families

First-hand accounts from Central American women and their family members reveal the dangerous and bleak circumstances of life these women and their children faced upon return to their home countries, as well as serious problems in the deportation process. 

READ MORE

Children in Immigration Court: Over 95 Percent Represented by an Attorney Appear in Court

Many children are placed in deportation proceedings before an immigration judge, where they will carry the legal burden of proving that they should be allowed to remain in the United States. The government does not guarantee them the right to a lawyer. As a result, many children navigate the complicated system without legal representation.

READ MORE

All Enforcement Content

  • Fact Sheet

The Growth of the U.S. Deportation Machine

Publication Date: 
March 1, 2014
Despite some highly public claims to the contrary, there has been no waning of immigration enforcement in the United States.
  • Practice Advisories

Seeking a Judicial Stay of Removal in the Court of Appeals

Publication Date: 
January 21, 2014
This Practice Advisory provides background information about requesting stays of removal from the court of appeals, discusses the legal standard for obtaining a stay, and addresses the implications of the government’s policy with respect to return of individuals who are successful on their appeal.
  • Amicus Briefs

Avalos-Palma v. United States - District Court for the District of New Jersey

Publication Date: 
January 21, 2014
The American Immigration Council and National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild (NIPNLG) are seeking to preserve federal court review of damages actions brought by noncitizens for abuse of authority by immigration agents.
  • Amicus Briefs

F- P- v. Holder - Ninth Circuit

Publication Date: 
January 3, 2014
Long used in criminal trials, motions to suppress can lead to the exclusion of evidence obtained by the government in violation of the Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, or related provisions of federal law. While the immediate purpose of filing a motion to suppress is to prevent the government from meeting its burden of proof, challenges to unlawfully obtained evidence can also deter future violations by law enforcement officers and thereby protect the rights of other noncitizens. The Supreme Court held in INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U.S. 1032 (1984), that motions to suppress evidence under the Fourth Amendment in immigration proceedings should be granted only for “egregious” violations or if violations became “widespread.” Despite this stringent standard, noncitizens have prevailed in many cases on motions to suppress.
  • Press Release

Federal Judge Enjoins Key Provisions of South Carolina’s Immigration Law

December 22, 2013

Washington, D.C.—The American Immigration Council welcomes today’s ruling from U.S. District Judge Richard M.

  • Special Report

The Faulty Legal Arguments Behind Immigration Detainers

Publication Date: 
December 18, 2013
In late June 2012, the Supreme Court struck down three provisions of Arizona’s SB 1070 and left a fourth vulnerable to future legal challenge. As has been well documented, the Court’s rejection of SB...
  • Special Report

Bordering on Criminal: The Routine Abuse of Migrants in the Removal System

Publication Date: 
December 10, 2013
This two-part series highlights the findings of the Migrant Border Crossing Study—a binational, multi-institution study of 1,110 randomly selected, recently repatriated migrants surveyed in six...
  • Practice Advisories

Departure Bar to Motions to Reopen and Reconsider: Legal Overview and Related Issues

Publication Date: 
November 20, 2013

This Practice Advisory discusses the "departure bar" to motions to reopen and arguments adopted by circuit courts that have rejected or upheld the bar.

  • Amicus Briefs

Ashcroft v. Abbasi (formerly Turkman v. Ashcroft) – U.S. Supreme Court

Publication Date: 
October 4, 2013
The Council, along with the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild (NIPNLG), is seeking to preserve federal court review of damages actions brought by noncitizens for abuse of authority by immigration agents. In actions brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), the government routinely moves to dismiss these cases on a variety of jurisdictional grounds, including by arguing that INA § 242(g) bars the court’s review of damages claims in any case involving removal procedures, and that a remedy under Bivens is not available in immigration-related actions. In essence, the government is attempting to deprive those who have been harmed by immigration agents of any remedy in federal court.
  • Press Release

ICE Agrees to Release Thousands of Previously-Withheld Records

August 2, 2013

Washington, DC – Yesterday, a U.S.

Most Read

  • Publications
  • Blog Posts
  • Past:
  • Trending