New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
Guidance to Nonprofits
Regarding Immigration Enforcement

We have entered a startling era of uncertainty in the long battle for civil rights and social justice. For
40 years, New York Lawyers for the Public Interest (NYLPI) has partnered with the private bar andcommunity leaders to bring the power of law and organizing to where it’s needed most. NYLPI works
with hundreds of nonprofit partners towards creating a New York where all people can thrive in theircommunities, with quality healthcare and housing, safe jobs, equal schools, and healthy neighborhoods.
With the rise in aggressive immigration enforcement by the current administration, dozens of nonprofits
approached NYLPI for advice about how to conduct business and convey to their clients that they may
continue to seek services.
With pro bono partners Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP and Stroock & Stroock & Lavan
LLP, we developed this guide to outline the rights of nonprofits to protect their immigrant clients andestablish best practices. This guide was also heavily informed by a stellar advisory drafted by Northwest
Immigrant Rights Project. The significant increase in immigration arrests—including in and aroundcourts, public buildings, and sensitive locations such as places of worship and schools—has caused
feelings of panic in immigrant communities. Many of our own clients express fear of going to court
and to health care providers to receive life-saving medical care because of the perceived dangers ofimmigration enforcement. Nonprofits and service providers must send a strong message to immigrantcommunities by establishing explicit policies.
About NYLPIFounded 40 years ago by leaders of the bar, New York Lawyers for the Public Interest pursues equality
and justice for all New Yorkers. NYLPI’s community-driven approach powers its commitments to civilrights and to health, disability, immigrant, and environmental justice. NYLPI seeks lasting change throughlegal representation, community organizing, policy advocacy, pro bono service, public education, andlitigation. Our Pro Bono Clearinghouse strengthens communities by providing innovative nonprofits
with free legal services, drawing on lawyers from New York’s most prestigious law firms and corporate
law departments. It helps nonprofits and community groups thrive by providing resources that helporganizations overcome legal obstacles, build capacity, and develop more effective programs.
Through educational workshops, trainings for nonprofit leaders, individual counseling, and a series ofpublications, the Clearinghouse is at the forefront of helping nonprofits maximize their performance andtheir impact on our community.
For more information please visit us at www.nylpi.org or call us at 212.244.4664 for pro bono
assistance with your organization. Disclaimer: These resources are for informational purposes only anddo not constitute legal advice. For answers to specific legal problems, issues or questions, obtain theadvice of a qualified attorney in your area.

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
N Y L P I

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
Guidance to Nonprofits
Regarding Immigration Enforcement

How likely is it that immigration agents might come to a nonprofit service provider?
No one can be sure given the shifting immigration enforcement priorities, but as of the issuance of
this document we have not seen any pattern of enforcement actions by Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) at or near nonprofit service providers. Given the significant increase in immigrationarrests recently, nonprofits serving immigrant communities should establish policies to ensure that theirclients are protected to the fullest extent of the law when using their facilities and services (see model
policies in Appendix A).
Can a nonprofit deny immigration agents entry into its facility?
Areas open to the general public (i.e., public space—such as a reception area or a library readingroom) are also open to immigration agents, and they may enter without a warrant.1 In doing so, ICE
agents must observe the same rules that any member of the public would. For example, ICE agents
operating without a warrant would not have the right to disrupt the nonprofit’s activities or mission.
Note that ICE agents may take photographs in public spaces.
ICE agents must have a judicial search or arrest warrant to lawfully access nonpublic areas (i.e.,areas not open to the public—such as private offices or areas in a homeless shelter where people
sleep).2 Such a warrant is always signed by a judge or magistrate within 14 calendar days andidentifies specific areas to be searched (see example of a judicial search warrant at Appendix B). ICE
agents may have “administrative” warrants signed by an immigration officer, not signed by a judge
or magistrate. Administrative warrants, unlike judicial search warrants, do not authorize ICE entry to
nonpublic areas (see excerpt of an administrative warrant at Appendix C). If agents seek entry into
nonpublic areas with an administrative warrant, not a judicial warrant, it is lawful to deny entry—so anonprofit should instruct staff not to consent to entry in such circumstances.
Note that ICE agents sometimes wear uniforms that say “Police,” even though they are not police
officers. Staff may ask whether those seeking entry are police or ICE agents. No matter the agency
involved, the same judicial warrant requirement applies—meaning that both police and ICE agents
must have a judicial search warrant to enter nonpublic areas. If ICE agents do not have a judicial
warrant, staff should ask the agents to wait to enter any nonpublic areas until the staff contacts counsel

Whether a space be considered “public” or “private” under Fourth Amendment standards is a fact specific inquiry that would be unique to a particular
nonprofit facility.
2
While a warrant is generally required, in certain circumstances law enforcement may enter non-public areas without a warrant and/or make an arrest
without a warrant. Typically those limited exceptions to the warrant requirement are triggered by some urgency related to an investigation of specificcriminal activity (e.g., an “exigency”). However, a warrant is required for immigration enforcement actions as described here, which target individuals
simply based on their undocumented status.
1

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
N Y L P I
2

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
Guidance to Nonprofits
Regarding Immigration Enforcement

and are legally entitled to tell the agents to leave the premises. If ICE agents do have a judicial
warrant, staff may ask the agents to wait to enter any nonpublic area until staff contacts counsel, but
the agents need not wait if the judicial warrant authorizes them to enter nonpublic areas.
Nonprofits should not provide information about clients unless ICE agents have a judicial warrant or
subpoena specifically requiring the release of that information or the client consents to the release of thisinformation. If ICE enters with a subpoena rather than a judicial warrant, staff should contact counsel before
complying with the subpoena. As is also discussed below, however, nonprofits may be prohibited fromreleasing certain information as a matter of law. ICE agents may not require access to information containedon a personal phone or email account without a judicial warrant. However, any information saved ona publicly accessible computer (e.g., in a library reading room) can be accessed without a warrant.
What can staff tell clients during an immigration enforcement action?
Staff members should tell clients that they have the right to ask for an attorney and to remain silent if
ICE agents ask questions. Staff may also encourage clients to remain calm and not attempt to leave
while ICE agents are present. Staff should not hide or conceal any person on the premises. However,this does not mean that staff is obligated to produce a client for ICE agents, unless the agents have a
judicial arrest warrant (i.e., a warrant signed by a judge authorizing the arrest of a specific individual).
What should staff members do if ICE agents question them?
Staff members should ask ICE agents if they are free to go. If the agent says “yes,” the person is free toleave. If the agent says “no,” the person should ask to consult with an attorney and should otherwise
remain silent. Staff should never make a false statement (e.g., if ICE agents ask about an individual
who is in the building, staff should not say the person is not there). They should instead decline to answer
questions and consult with a supervisor who has been trained to handle this situation by calling counsel.
Are there special protections for certain nonprofits based on the nature ofservice provided?
The same general rule applies to all nonprofits: ICE agents may enter any space open to the public
and must have a judicial arrest or search warrant to enter space not open to the public. However,“sensitive locations” policies adopted by ICE in the past discourage enforcement actions at certain
locations and require agents go through supervisory review if actions are undertaken (except incertain exigent circumstances).3 The list of “sensitive locations” includes, but is not limited to, schools,
hospitals, and institutions of worship. Additionally, ICE agents have been instructed to use particular
3

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Enforcement Actions at or Focused on Sensitive Locations (Oct. 24, 2011), available at:https://www.ice.gov/doclib/ero-outreach/pdf/10029.2-policy.pdf.

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
N Y L P I
3

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
Guidance to Nonprofits
Regarding Immigration Enforcement

care with organizations that assist children, pregnant women, victims of crime or abuse, or individuals
with significant mental or physical disabilities. Note that this general sensitive location policy is subject
to change or termination by ICE at any time.
What if a client is detained in or near the nonprofit facility?
Staff has the right to observe from a reasonable distance but should not interfere with the actions of ICE
agents. Staff may ask for the names of ICE agents. If agents are in plainclothes, staff may ask to see
credentials and make note of agents’ names and badge numbers. Staff may lawfully take video to makea record of the action.4 Staff may ask ICE agents’ permission to obtain from a detained client the contact
information of anyone who should be informed of the client’s detention (e.g., a family member, friend or
attorney). Staff may also ask where the client will be detained. If the detained client authorizes them to do so,
staff may provide all information obtained from ICE agents to the friend or family member so identified.
May nonprofits provide clients with “Know Your Rights” resources?
Yes. Nonprofits may offer written materials or presentations for clients. Note that many civil rights andimmigrants’ rights organizations have prepared “Know Your Rights” guides.5
What is the appropriate way to handle a “subpoena” related to ICE enforcement
activities?
A subpoena is a written request for information. A subpoena is not a court order, is typically not signed
by a judge, and always gives a certain amount of time to comply. Failure to respond to avalid subpoena may result in a contempt of court finding. Upon receipt of a subpoena, nonprofits
should take note of the date it was served, method of service, and deadline for responding. Nonprofits
should then promptly engage counsel and instruct staff to preserve potentially relevant documents.
Can a nonprofit avoid disclosure of information in response to a subpoena?
Federal law protects certain personal information from a subpoena. The Health Insurance Portability
and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”) protects individually identifiable health information, which generally
can only be disclosed in response to a subpoena after the nonprofit holding the requested information
has taken certain steps, including notifying the patient or obtaining the patient’s authorization. The
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (often called “FERPA”) protects students’ education records,
which schools generally may not produce without taking certain steps to notify the student or parent.
Nonprofits may elect to advise employees to first announce their intent to video—not because doing so is legally required in this context—but in order toprevent a dispute with ICE agents who may not understand the relevant legal protections.
5
For example, ACLU’s Know Your Rights guide is available at https://www.aclu.org/files/kyr/MKG17-KYR-PoliceImmigrationFBI-OnePager-English-v01.pdf,
and a toolkit jointly prepared by the Immigrant Defense Project and Center for Constitutional Rights is available athttps://www.immigrantdefenseproject.org/raids-toolkit/
4

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
N Y L P I
4

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
Guidance to Nonprofits
Regarding Immigration Enforcement

Nonprofits will likely be most concerned about subpoenas that request clients’ confidential information
like names, addresses, phone numbers, Social Security numbers, and other personal identifying
information. This information may be protected from disclosure through the methods discussed above.
When responding to a subpoena, nonprofits should only turn over those non-privileged documents
requested and should not volunteer information.
As a general matter, nonprofits that receive a subpoena requesting clients’ personal information should
consult counsel to determine if the subpoena can be blocked in whole or in part. Moreover, in order toensure maximum privacy for clients, nonprofits should consider instructing staff to avoid memorializing
information about undocumented clients’ immigration status unless this would interfere with thefunction of the organization.
What if a subpoena is issued to nonprofit legal services providers?
Legal services providers and other nonprofits must be careful not to produce privileged documents.
Documents containing communications with an attorney for the purpose of obtaining/rendering
legal advice are protected by the “attorney-client privilege” and should not be produced. Documents
prepared for purposes of litigation by counsel, or prepared by a client at the direction of counsel, areprotected by the “attorney work-product doctrine” and should not be produced. Instead, counsel for a
nonprofit will produce a “privilege log” cataloging all such protected documents.

DATED: July 19, 2017

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
N Y L P I
5

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
Guidance to Nonprofits
Regarding Immigration Enforcement

APPENDIX A6SAMPLE PROTOCOL REGARDING INTERACTIONS WITH IMMIGRATION AGENCIES
Note: This template is a generic protocol. We encourage each agency to consult with counsel to evaluate and provide advice as to appropriate policies and procedures.
POLICY
It is the policy of [Nonprofit] to ensure that our clients are safe and protected when they use our facilities and services. [Nonprofit] will take steps to the greatest
extent possible under the law to protect our clients and their information. It is the policy of [Nonprofit] not to allow agents or employees of U.S. Immigration
and Customs Enforcement (ICE) access to our facilities, records or information unless this is required by law or a valid judicial warrant. The same policies andprocedures apply to police officers who may act with ICE to enforce the immigration laws.
PROCEDURES
Procedures regarding access to [Nonprofit] facilities/buildings:
If any agents or employees from ICE should attempt to enter [Agency]’s buildings or facilities, staff will follow this protocol:
1. If ICE agents claim to have a warrant to enter the facility/building, reception staff should ask for a copy of the warrant, ask agents to wait at a specified
location, and immediately contact a supervisor for assistance. [include information on supervisor(s) to be contacted and how]
2. Staff [or insert front-line staff title] should inform ICE agents that they do NOT have consent to enter the nonpublic areas of the facility unless they have avalid judicial warrant.
3. Supervisor should review the warrant to ensure that a) it is signed by a judge or magistrate, b) it describes [Nonprofit]’s building as the place to be
searched, c) it has the correct date and was issued within the past 14 days, and d) the search does not exceed the scope of the items authorized to be
searched. Administrative warrants signed by an immigration officer, not a judge, do not require ICE be allowed to enter non-public areas of the facility.
4. [If applicable because Nonprofit qualifies as a “sensitive location”] Staff should inform ICE agents that [Nonprofit] is as a “sensitive location” under ICE
policy and explain why.
5. Supervisors should be advised to immediately contact legal counsel. [include information on who should be contacted and how]
6. Staff may advise clients that they have the right to remain silent, but should not direct clients not to answer questions. Staff may not assist clients in escaping
or hiding.
7. Staff should not answer questions posed by agents without consulting a supervisor. In particular, staff should not answer questions about whether aparticular person (client or staff) is currently in the facility, but instead state that they are not authorized to answer questions.
8. Staff should document the name/contact information of the ICE agents seeking access to the facility. This can be done by asking for a business card, orname and badge number.
9. Staff may record any interactions with the agents, but they must announce that they are doing so. Staff should remain a reasonable distance from such
incidents so as not to interfere.
10. Staff and clients should know (or be informed) that if they are engaged in questioning by immigration agents, they can ask the agents if they are free to go.
If the agent says yes, they are free to leave. If the agent says the person is not free to go, they should explain that they would like the opportunity to consult
with an attorney and otherwise remain silent.
Procedures regarding immigration agents’ request for access to [Nonprofit] records/files:
If any ICE agent should request access to records or documents regarding [Nonprofit]’s clients or staff:
1. Staff—preferably a supervisor—should inform agents that [Nonprofit]’s policy is not to release information without a client’s consent, unless disclosure isrequired by judicial order or subpoena specifically requiring the release of the information, or otherwise required by law.
2. If agents claim to have a warrant or subpoena, staff should not release information without consulting with a supervisor. Staff—preferably a supervisor—
should request a copy of the warrant or subpoena, ask for the agents’ contact information and consult with a supervisor.
3. If such information is requested, a supervisor should immediately contact counsel, as above.
Procedures regarding completing a report after an ICE enforcement action:
1. Immediately after an enforcement action has concluded, a supervisor must complete a report on the enforcement action in order to collect the information
identified below.
6

See Lowenstein Sandler LLP, Advisory to Nonprofit Organizations and Social Service Providers Regarding Immigration Enforcement, Appendices C and D(2017), available at: https://www.lowenstein.com/files/upload/Advisory%20for%20Nonprofits%20on%20Immigration%20Enforcement.PDF; Northwest
Immigrant Rights Project, Advisory to Nonprofit Organizations and Social Service Providers Regarding Immigration Enforcement, Appendix A (April 3, 2017),
available at: http://nwirp.org/nonprofit-org-advisory.pdf.

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
N Y L P I
6

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
Guidance to Nonprofits
Regarding Immigration Enforcement

APPENDIX A (continued)
INFORMATION TO BE COLLECTED BY EMPLOYEES AFTER AN ICE ENFORCEMENT ACTION
Date of enforcement action?
Time action began and ended?
Describe the enforcement action:• How many agents?
• What agency conducted the action (i.e., ICE, local police or state police)?
• Names and/or badge numbers of the agents:• How did their uniforms identify them?
• Why did they say they were there?
• Did you ask to see a warrant?
• Did the agents present a warrant?
• If not, did you deny them consent to enter? What did you say?
• How did they react if you denied them consent to enter?
• If the agents presented a warrant, was a supervisor alerted? Who?
• Was the warrant an administrative warrant, signed by an immigration official?
• If it was an administrative warrant, did you tell the agents that your organization has a policy of denying access to nonpublic areas in the absenceof a judicial warrant? What did you say?
• How did the agents react if you denied them consent to enter based on an administrative warrant?
• Did the agents present a judicial warrant, signed by a judge?
• If so, please describe the warrant:o What was the date of the warrant?
o What items or persons were the subjects of the search?
o What areas were identified to be searched?
o Which judge signed the warrant?
• Did you allow the agents entry based on a judicial warrant?
• If so, did you or another staff member accompany them on their search? Who?
• Did the agents stay within the areas they were authorized to search by the warrant? If not, what other areas did they enter? Did they look in closed
closets, cabinets, or drawers? Did they ask permission first?
• Did they keep anyone from moving around freely? Who?
• Did they arrest anyone? Who?
• Did they seize any items? What?
• Did they take pictures of documents? If so, whose? How did they get the documents?
• Did they take fingerprints? If so, whose?
• Were there children present? If so, whose? How many?
• Did the agents yell at anyone? Who? Why? Which agents (if known)?
• Did the agents have guns drawn or were they touching their weapons?
• Is there anything else to add about the enforcement action?

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
N Y L P I
7

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
Guidance to Nonprofits
Regarding Immigration Enforcement

APPENDIX B

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
N Y L P I
8

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
Guidance to Nonprofits
Regarding Immigration Enforcement

APPENDIX CNew York Lawyers for the Public Interest
N Y L P I
9

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
Guidance to Nonprofits
Regarding Immigration Enforcement

For their invaluable contribution to the drafting and preparation of this guide,
New York Lawyers for the Public Interest wishes to thank:
Northwest Immigrant Rights Project
Emily B. Goldberg, Pro Bono Counsel, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Anand Sithian, Associate, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Joel Dodge, Associate, Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLPDavid W. Lowden, Special Counsel, Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP
Kevin J. Curnin, Partner, Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP
We would also like to thankBaher Azmy, Center for Constitutional Rights,
Alexander Shalom, ACLU-NJ,
Laura Abel, Lawyers Alliance for New Yorkand Mizue Aizeki, Immigrant Defense Project
for their thoughtful review of this guide.

For more information contact:
New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
151 West 30th Street, 11th floor
New York, NY 10001-4017
Tel 212-244-4664
Fax 212-244-4570
www.nylpi.org

New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
N Y L P I
10