FacultyFaculty/Author Profile

Stacy Tolchin

Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin

Los Angeles, CA, USA

Ms. Tolchin has practiced exclusively in immigration law since 2001. Prior to establishing the Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin in December 2010, Stacy was a staff attorney with Van Der Hout, Brigagliano & Nightingale, LLP, a San Francisco-based immigration law firm.
Ms. Tolchin specializes in complex deportation cases and primarily litigates before the Courts of Appeals and United States District Courts, as well as the Executive Office for Immigration Review. She also speaks regularly at conferences regarding federal court immigration litigation, removal defense, and national security immigration cases.

  • University of California at Los Angeles, Juris Doctor, 2001 (Program in Public Interest Law and Policy)
  • Oberlin College, Bachelor of Arts, 1996


  • National Immigration Project for the National Lawyers Guild, Board of Directors, Chair
  • American Immigration Lawyers Association, Member
  • National Lawyers Guild, Member
  • Los Angeles County Bar Association, Member

Awards and Acknowledgements

  • Super Lawyers: 2012-2016
  • American Immigration Lawyers Association’s Jack Wasserman Award for Excellence in Immigration Litigation (2009)
  • American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California Equal Justice Advocacy Award 2009
  • National Immigration Law Center Annual Award (2008)
  • “Unsung Hero” Award from the National Lawyers Guild of the Bay Area (2007)
  • Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee of San Francisco (2003)

Select Cases

  • Brown v CBP, 132 F.Supp.3d 1170 (N.D. Cal. 2015) (denial of Government’s Motion to Dismiss in proposed class action challenging US Customs and Border Protection’s failure to timely respond to Freedom of Information Act requests)
  • Hassine v. Johnson, 53 F. Supp. 3d 1297 (E.D. Cal. 2014) (Attorneys’ fees case for naturalization matter pending in district court.)
  • Husyev v. Mukasey, 528 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2008) (finding that courts have jurisdiction to review agency’s failure to follow asylum regulations)
  • Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 2008) (finding that victim of gang-rape in the Philippines had suffered past persecution based on her father’s political opinion)
  • Duran-Gonzalez et. al. v. DHS., — F.Supp.2d —-, 2006 WL 3289769 (W.D.Wash., Nov. 13, 2006) (class action challenging Department of Homeland Security’s failure to follow Ninth Circuit precedent in consideration of applications for adjustment of status where the applicant had been previously deported) overturned by Duran-Gonzalez v. DHS, 508 F.3d 1227 (9th Cir. 2007);
  • Padilla-Padilla v. Gonzales, 463 F.3d 972 (9th Cir. 2006) (challenge to Board of Immigration Appeals’ failure to follow its internal regulations)
  • Arreola-Arreola v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 956 (9th Cir. 2004) (holding that habeas corpus review must be available to individuals challenging old removal orders when the government seeks to deport them for illegally reentering the country after they have been previously deported)
  • Singh v. Still, 470 F.Supp.2d 1064 (N.D. Cal 2007) (successful petition for writ of mandamus challenging Department of Homeland Security’s unreasonable delay in the adjudication of applications for permanent residency)
  • Zavala v. Ridge, 310 F. Supp. 2d 1071 (N.D. Cal. 2004) (Department of Homeland Security’s “automatic stay” regulation that keeps non-citizens in custody while their immigration cases are pending, even after an immigration judge has ordered their release, is facially unconstitutional)
  • Araujo v. INS, 301 F. Supp. 2d 1095 (N.D. Cal. 2004) (Federal Tort Claims Act action finding that the United States government was liable for damages to a non-citizen for unlawful deportation).


  • United States Supreme Court
  • United States Courts of Appeals for the Ninth, Tenth, and Second Circuits
  • U.S. District Courts for the Western District of Washington, Northern District of California, Eastern District of California and Central District of California
  • State Bar of California

  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2018 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2018 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.