Global Immigration Counsel : Immigration Lawyer & Attorney : Littler Mendelson Law Firm : Permanent Residence, Labor Certification : Global Immigration Counsel

Proposed legislation in Pennsylvania and New Jersey would impose stricter work authorization verification requirements on employers.

Pennsylvania

House Bill 1502 would require all contractors and subcontractors on public works projects to verify the employment eligibility of new employees through E-Verify, the federal electronic employment verification system, and to verify existing employees’ Social Security numbers. In June 2010, this bill was referred to the House State Government Committee.

House Bill 1503 would require all construction industry employers to verify the employment eligibility of new employees through E-Verify and to verify existing employees’ Social Security numbers. This bill was passed by the House in June 2010 and is currently in the Senate Labor and Industry Committee.

Employers that in good faith rely on federal programs (E-Verify and the Social Security Number Verification Service) to verify new employees’ legal work status and existing employees’ Social Security numbers will be immune from sanctions. However, employers face debarment from public work contracts (HB 1502) or license forfeiture (HB 1503) for noncompliance. Additionally, employers could face civil liability for retaliating against employees who complain about alleged violations or participate in investigations, hearing or inquiries concerning alleged violations.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

On July 28, 2010, the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona issued a highly anticipated order in United States v. State of Arizona, a recent federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Arizona “Support of Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act” (“SB 1070”). The order temporarily enjoins enforcement of certain provisions of SB 1070 pending the court’s final ruling in the matter. To learn more, please continue reading Littler's ASAP, What Arizona's Controversial Immigration Law Means for Employers, by Neil M. Alexander and Michael J. Lehet.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

According to the Salt Lake Tribune, since the July 1, 2010, effective date of a Utah law requiring businesses with 15 or more employees to verify new hires’ work status through E-Verify, less than one-third have done so. The figure did not surprise Utah Governor Gary Herbert, who stated that even the law’s sponsor did not expect universal compliance. Some suggest that employers either do not know about the new requirement to use the federal electronic employment verification system, or are not hiring due to poor economic conditions, which could explain the low enrollment numbers.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

With the July 2, 2010 submission deadline approaching, individuals in Washington are trying to collect 241,153 signatures to place an immigration-related measure on the November ballot, reports the Seattle Times. Employment-related provisions of proposed initiative I-1056 (pdf) include:

• Requiring all employers, after making an offer of employment, to verify the individual’s eligibility to work in the United States, using programs such as E-Verify.
• Making it an unlawful employment practice to terminate a U.S. citizen, or a permanent resident applying for naturalization, when an illegal alien is employed at the same job site or in a similar position at a different site.

Since 2006, similar measures have failed to get certified, and the chances for a 2010 measure are slim, given the campaign’s lack of funds and the absence of major party support for the measure.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The New York Times reports that the Massachusetts Senate has voted 28 to 10 in favor of an immigration-related amendment (pdf) to the state budget bill that would require state contractors to verify that their workers are legally authorized to live and work in the United States. The proposed law also would penalize contractors violating the law by prohibiting them from doing business with the state. Additionally, the state attorney general’s office would be required to set up a hotline by which people could anonymously report alleged hiring of illegal immigrants, and to investigate such allegations.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Washington Post reports that acting Solicitor General Neil Katyal has submitted a brief (pdf) on behalf of the Obama administration urging the U.S. Supreme Court to review and invalidate the Legal Arizona Workers Act (LAWA), a 2008 law that imposes sanctions far greater than those prescribed by federal law on employers that hire illegal immigrants (Note: LAWA is a different law than Arizona’s recently enacted and controversial immigration enforcement law.). The petition (pdf) for Supreme Court review was originally filed by a coalition that includes the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, civil libertarians and Latino groups.

The brief presents the administration’s position that federal law preempts this state law, and argues that upholding the law would:

"disrupt a careful balance that Congress struck nearly 25 years ago between two interests of the highest importance: ensuring that employers do not undermine enforcement of immigration laws by hiring unauthorized workers, while also ensuring that employers not discriminate against racial and ethnic minorities legally in the country."

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Arizona Daily Star reports that several days after S.B. 1070, Arizona’s controversial immigration bill, became law, the legislature passed H.B. 2162, which clarifies when police officers may inquire into an individual’s immigration status. Under H.B. 2162, an inquiry can occur if:

• an officer performs a lawful stop, detention or arrest based on a town, city, county or state law; and
• the officer has reasonable suspicion that a person is an alien and is unlawfully present in the United States.

The language in H.B. 2162 does not amend S.B. 1070; however, when S.B. 1070 takes effect, the revised language in H.B. 2162 will take precedence because it was adopted more recently.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

With many in the nation watching, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed the "Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act" ("SB 1070") into law. The legislation represents Arizona's latest effort to combat illegal immigration and is now the centerpiece of a national political firestorm, including criticism from President Obama and numerous public interest groups. In addition, SB 1070 already is the subject of two federal lawsuits challenging its constitutionality. Lost among this debate, however, are those provisions of the law directed toward Arizona employers. To learn more about the law and its implications for employers, please continue reading Littler's ASAP What Arizona's Controversial Immigration Law Means for Employers by Neil M. Alexander and Michael J. Lehet.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has signed into law an immigration enforcement bill generally acknowledged to be the “broadest and strictest immigration measure in generations.” The bill has attracted national attention, even drawing strong criticism from President Obama who, according to The Daily Telegraph, has instructed the U.S. Department of Justice to examine the measure’s legality.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A controversial Arizona immigration enforcement bill (S.B. 1070) moved one step closer to becoming law when the state senate approved the measure on April 19. The bill has been sent to Governor Jan Brewer for her signature or veto. As reported by The Los Angeles Times, most observers expect her to sign the bill. Brewer has until April 24 to act on the bill; if she neither signs nor vetoes the bill, it will become law within 90 days of the end of Arizona’s legislative session.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The New York Times reports that Arizona legislators have given preliminary approval to legislation that primarily concerns State enforcement of federal immigration laws. H.B. 2632, which is nearly identical to a bill passed in February by the state senate (S.B. 1070), would, among other things, allow police officers to charge illegal immigrants with criminal trespassing based solely on their presence in Arizona. The two bills must now go through reconciliation, which is expected to occur within the next two weeks.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

AZCapitolTimes.com reports that Arizona’s senate, by a party-line 17-13 vote, passed a broad, immigration-focused bill covering a wide range of topics including law enforcement procedures, criminal law, and traffic congestion. The bill would:

• require police officers to make a reasonable attempt to determine a person’s immigration status when “practicable;”
• allow illegal immigrants to be charged with trespassing;
• make it unlawful for anyone seeking work, regardless of their immigration status, to enter a vehicle stopped on the street;
• penalize drivers who impede traffic in an attempt to hire a day laborer;
• prohibit state and local governments from adopting policies that restrict the enforcement of immigration laws; and
• require state and local governments to comply with, and assist in enforcing, federal immigration laws.

The bill now moves to Arizona’s house of representatives for consideration.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The U.S. Supreme Court has asked the Solicitor General to submit a brief outlining the Obama administration’s stance on an Arizona law that punishes companies for hiring illegal immigrants, the Miami Herald reports. The justices will review this brief before deciding whether to hear a challenge to the law.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has announced that it will begin to investigate workplaces in all 50 states to identify employers who are hiring undocumented workers. Specifically on July 1, 2009, ICE launched a comprehensive audit initiative and issued Notices of Inspection (NOIs) to 652 businesses nationwide. States are also beginning to increase their enforcement efforts so employers should take steps to ensure compliance with both federal and state immigration requirements. Continue reading Littler ASAP "Latest Developments in Employment Verification Enforcement" by Jorge R. Lopez, Chadwick M. Graham and Melissa M. Randall.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

On March 12, 2009, a federal district court in Illinois ruled that a state law prohibiting employers from enrolling in the federal E-Verify program violates the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution. United States v Illinois, CDIll, No 07-3261 (Mar. 12, 2009). The Illinois Right to Privacy in the Workplace Act (Ill. P.A. 95-137), scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2008, amended the Illinois Right to Privacy Act by prohibiting employers in the state from enrolling in the E-Verify program until the Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) were able to achieve a 99% accuracy rating with regard to making a determination on tentative nonconfirmation notices within three days of issuance.

The DHS sued the State of Illinois to repeal the law saying that it interfered with an employer’s right to participate in the voluntary federal program to verify whether a potential employee has valid U.S. work authorization. The federal district court in Illinois sided with DHS, holding that the law is preempted by the Supremacy Clause. Even though the E-Verify program is not mandatory, the court reasoned that the state law frustrates Congress’ intent to make the program available to all employers. The district court enjoined the State of Illinois from enforcing the law.

This article was written by Jorge R. Lopez, a shareholder in Littler's Miami office.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Senate Bill 23, the "Fair and Legal Employment for Coloradans Act," was killed in the Senate Committee on State, Veterans & Military Affairs. The bill, sponsored by Senator David Schultheis (R- Colorado Springs), would have required employers to participate in the federal E-Verify program. On his website, Sen. Schultheis had the following to say about the bill's defeat :

This bill was killed in State Affairs committee on 2/8 by Democrats on a party-line vote."
 

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Indiana state senator Mike Delph has introduced S.B. 580, legislation that he calls "one of the toughest illegal immigration bills in the country." If passed, S.B. 580 would:

• prohibit Indiana employers from knowingly hiring unauthorized aliens
• provide escalating penalties for violations of the act
• establish an affirmative defense if an employer complied in good faith with federal employment verification requirements

The bill is a modified version of legislation that was submitted last year, and is expected to be heard by the Senate Committee on Pension and Labor in early February.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Today, Arkansas state representative Bill Sample introduced H.B. 1093, the "Arkansas Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act of 2009" -- a bill nearly identical to Oklahoma's H.B. 1804, which passed by an overwhelming majority in 2007. Read our earlier blog post for background on H.B. 1093.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Arkansas Democrat Gazette reports that Arkansas state representative Bill Sample plans to introduce a bill requiring, in part, verification of Social Security numbers prior to the issuance of employee identification cards. Rep. Sample made the following comments about the bill:

It will establish proper guidelines for the issuance of identification cards and documents. ... We're trying to define who can give out identification cards and what those ID cards would state. We don't want those phony ID cards to go out. ... If you give them an ID card, you're responsible to do a little due diligence and make sure that person is in the state legally.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Wyoming lawmakers are considering immigration legislation that would eventually require all Wyoming employers to participate in E-Verify. Under H.B. 0103, all employers would be required to participate in E-Verify not more than three years after the effective date of the act. 

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Senator Brad Ashford has introduced L.B. 34, the "Nebraska Fair and Legal Employment Act." The bill would, among other things, require all employers to participate in E-Verify by 2011.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

According to an Associated Press pre-session survey, a majority of participating Nebraska state legislators support tough policies on illegal immigration. Measures favored by the lawmakers include requiring employers to use the federal employment verification system, E-Verify. See the complete story in the Columbus Telegram.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link