Policy breakdown and law firm strategies for clients with criminal records facing mandatory detention.
When Congress passed the Laken Riley Act (LRA) in January 2025, it significantly altered the landscape for noncitizens with criminal histories. For immigration attorneys, navigating the Act’s expanded mandatory detention mandates demands both strategic foresight and robust client intake procedures.
At Immigration Paralegals, we help law firms integrate these workflows into your case systems so your team can respond quickly and confidently, without overloading your calendar. Below, we break down the law, flag high‑risk client profiles, and offer practice‑adjusted strategies your firm can adopt now.
What the Laken Riley Act Does
Expanded Mandatory Detention Under INA § 236(c)
The LRA amends INA § 236(c) by adding § 236(c)(1)(E). Under this change:
- DHS must detain (without release on bond) noncitizens who are inadmissible under specific grounds (e.g. § 212(a)(6)(A), (C), or § 212(a)(7)) and who are charged with, convicted of, or admit to certain offenses — specifically burglary, theft, larceny, shoplifting, assault on law enforcement, or any crime yielding death or serious bodily injury.
- Under § 236(c) as expanded by LRA, individuals properly classified are not entitled to a bond hearing, though they may contest classification in a Joseph hearing or via other relief.
- It also requires DHS, subject to enforcement and operational constraints, to issue detainers and take custody in applicable cases.
In essence, LRA eliminates bond eligibility for a broader class of noncitizens arrested or implicated in the covered offenses, even in some cases where convictions are not yet secured.
Retroactivity, State Lawsuits & Constitutional Challenges
- The LRA is written to apply to pending cases and past criminal records, meaning clients with older convictions now face new risks.
- It also empowers state attorneys general to sue the federal government over immigration enforcement and release decisions, injecting political pressure into detention decisions–subject to standing and remedy limits in court challenges.
- Constitutional risks abound: due process, separation of powers, and equal protection arguments are already being raised in litigation.
Given these tensions, many of the arguments that immigration counsel relied on before; e.g. individualized bond, equitable discretion, suppression of criminal evidence, remain relevant, but must be adapted to a more constrained statutory regime.
Identifying Clients at Risk Under the LRA
Effective triage is essential. Below are client profiles that should trigger immediate attention and intake protocols:
High‑Risk Indicators
- Criminal history involving theft, larceny, burglary, shoplifting, or assault on law enforcement
Whether or not there was a conviction, clients with these offenses are now squarely in LRA’s scope. - Admission or statements of relevant criminal conduct
Clients who admit or assert conduct falling within the listed offenses may be treated as falling under § 236(c)(1)(E), even absent a formal charge, (depending on how the admission is legally framed and proven). - Clients currently in state criminal proceedings or under arrest
The statute triggers arrest or charge, not only post-conviction. - Past convictions (even distant in time) in the listed categories
Because the law is retroactive, older records may qualify a client for mandatory detention under the new regime. - Complex cases where the client claims rehabilitation, relief eligibility, or discretionary relief
Any case where you would have argued for humanitarian discretion, bond, or suppression now faces a new statutory overlay. These clients need early, intensive planning.
Lower Risk or Exclusion Categories
It’s important to note which clients should not fall under the LRA:
- Lawful permanent residents, refugees, asylees, or visa holders adjudged admissible, the statute is aimed at noncitizens in removal and inadmissibility categories.
- Offenses outside the enumerated list (e.g. certain drug offenses, regulatory crimes) that do not implicate theft, assault, or death/serious injury.
- Clients whose records are eligible to be vacated, erased, or collaterally attacked in criminal courts, if successful, may remove the trigger from the client’s history.
When onboarding, the intake must specifically flag any criminal contacts, past pleas, admissions, and arrest records. Do not rely on clients’ memory or assumption that “it was minor.”
Law Firm Strategies for Mitigating Risk and Defending Clients
Below is a playbook your firm can layer into your case-prep workflows. These strategies aim to identify escape routes, preserve challenges, and intervene early.
Strategy A: Criminal Stage Advocacy & Early Intervention
- Engage criminal defense counsel early
Encourage clients (and defense partners) to avoid admissions or plea language that create a clean match with LRA triggers. Tailor plea language to avoid the essential elements of the enumerated crimes. - Seek suppression or dismissal motions
If the arrest or police conduct is unconstitutional, suppression arguments can sever the link that triggers mandatory detention. - Motion to withdraw plea or vacate conviction
Where possible, explore vacatur or postconviction relief to expunge or set aside convictions that fall under LRA. - Alternative sentencing or diversion
Work to redirect cases into diversion, completion programs, or noncriminal dispositions when possible to avoid a conviction that triggers LRA.
Strategy B: Immigration Defense & Detention Challenges
- Request a Joseph hearing
A Joseph hearing allows presentation of evidence regarding risk, community ties, or misclassification of the conviction. Although LRA reduces bond eligibility, it does not eliminate the possibility of contesting detention’s application. - Habeas corpus petitions
Use habeas petitions in federal court to argue LRA detention is unconstitutional (or misapplied). - Challenge retroactive application
For older convictions or conduct occurring before LRA’s passage, argue that retroactive application violates due process. - Constitutional and statutory challenges
Raise equal protection, due process, nondelegation, and separation of powers claims as needed. - Emergency motions and injunctions
In jurisdictions where LRA is being litigated, monitor for injunctions that pause enforcement in certain circuits, and move quickly to seek relief on behalf of clients.
Strategy C: Client Communication, Intake, & Workflow Integration
- Modify your intake process
Add detailed criminal history screening, arrests, charges, dismissals, admissions, pleas, and trigger alerts for LRA‑relevant offenses. - Tier clients by risk
Create a risk scoring system (e.g. “LRA Trigger High / Moderate / Low”) to allocate resources and set timelines for urgent action. - Develop detention logistics protocols
For clients immediately detained, have prison contact resources, bond logistics, litigation deadlines, and document access workflows ready. - Coordinate with criminal defense teams
Maintain cross‑practice communication to ensure criminal and immigration strategies are aligned. - Ongoing monitoring and review
Periodically re‑evaluate clients whose criminal history cases resolve, are expunged, or are vacated and adjust strategies accordingly.
Strategy D: Portfolio Management and Delegation
Because the LRA creates high-urgency cases, your firm must prevent burnout and ensure consistent quality:
- Standardize templates and checklists
Build vetted procedures for detention challenges, bond strategies, suppression motions, and habeas filings. - Outsource scalable tasks
Use a paralegal team, such as ours at Immigration Paralegals, to manage record pulls, criminal history compilations, case updates, and calendar management. This frees your attorneys to focus on strategy and litigation. - Cross-train team members
Rotate team knowledge on LRA‑specific issues so no single attorney or staff member becomes a chokepoint. - Institute a rapid‑response team
For clients detained under LRA, have a “war room” team that springs into action, document collection, criminal records, motion drafting, habeas preparation.
Projected Impacts & Firm Risk Management
Caseload Surge & Resource Strain
Because LRA turns many past minor offenses into no‑bond cases, many more clients will face detention. Firms should expect:
- A spike in emergency and last-minute cases
- An increase in habeas and suppression filings
- Higher overhead in record collection, expert affidavits, and criminal-immigration coordination
Having scalable workflows and delegatable tasks is critical to absorbing this increased load.
Differential Outcomes Across Circuits
Because federal challenges to LRA are likely to play out unevenly across courts, your clients in some jurisdictions may enjoy relief or injunctions that are unavailable elsewhere. Your firm must keep a circuit-by-circuit map and route cases intelligently.
Long-Term Monitoring & Litigation Trends
As constitutional challenges progress, certain aspects of LRA may be struck down or narrowed. Your firm should:
- Monitor precedent and adjust strategies promptly
- Participate (or collaborate with) impact litigation or amicus efforts
- Inform clients proactively when favorable rulings open new pathways
How Immigration Paralegals Supports Your Firm in the LRA Era
To respond effectively under the Laken Riley Act, your firm needs nimble, high-quality operational support that integrates into your existing systems. That’s precisely where our team steps in.
- Criminal history audits: We pull, organize, and normalize arrest, charge, conviction, and disposition records so no detail slips through.
- Intake triage systems: We build and maintain your risk‑scoring workflows to flag LRA triggers at the earliest point.
- Calendar & deadline management: LRA cases move fast. We track and alert on bond windows, habeas deadlines, criminal court dates, and overlap points.
- Template drafting & boilerplate research: We prebuild motions, suppression templates, habeas skeletons, and jurisdictional variance memos specific to LRA strategy, saving your attorneys hours.
- Workflow integration: We plug into your practice management system (Clio, MyCase, etc.), unify how your attorneys and support staff see LRA alerts, and maintain version control.
- Quality control & consistency: We audit completed tasks, standardize file indexing, and ensure no missing assumptions or client‑history gaps.
By handing these time‑intensive but low‑discretion tasks to our experienced team, your attorneys remain focused on high-value strategy, litigation, and client relationships — not chasing records or managing calendars.
The Bottom Line: Next Steps for Your Firm
The Laken Riley Act has raised the stakes for noncitizen clients with criminal histories. Law firms that adopt a proactive, systematized response will distinguish themselves in this new environment.
Here’s what you can do today:
- Run a “LRA risk audit” of all open cases with criminal history potentials.
- Update your intake forms and trigger flags to reflect LRA‑relevant conduct.
- Work with your team or vendor (like us) to build workflow templates and automated alerts.
- Train attorneys and staff on LRA basics, procedural challenges, and mitigation strategies.
- Establish a rapid‑response protocol for detention cases, with roles, checklists, and resource allocation.
At Immigration Paralegals, we help immigration attorneys manage exactly this kind of surge in complexity, so your firm is ready, resilient, and scalable under stress. If you want help auditing your case roster, building LRA‑alert systems, or staffing your rapid‑response team, let’s talk.
Schedule a Clarity Call to map how our support team can bring peace of mind and free your attorneys to practice law, even under the pressure of LRA cases.
Disclaimer: The information in this article is provided for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws change and the facts of your situation matter. Do not make decisions based on this article. You should consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific circumstances. No warranty is made as to completeness or accuracy as of the date of publication.