President Obama Comments on E-Verify

During a recent White House press conference, President Obama was asked whether he would veto a mandatory E-Verify bill that did not include immigration reform provisions. Without directly answering the question, Obama stated, “We may not be able to get everything that I would like to see in a package, but we have to have a balanced package.” Though Obama acknowledged that the E-Verify employment authorization system can be “an important [immigration] enforcement tool,” he added a caveat – “if it’s not riddled with errors.”

Skepticism surrounding E-Verify’s accuracy is not new. The Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services have been gradually making improvements to the E-Verify system, many of which are intended to improve its accuracy rate.

The need to attain an acceptable level of accuracy grows as the number of E-Verify users expands. Computerworld reports that more than 250,000 U.S. employers have already signed up for E-Verify, with another 1,300 new businesses enrolling each week. State and local legislation mandating E-Verify use is continually rising. Additionally, in June 2011 two bills were introduced in Congress that would require all employers to use E-Verify. 

More States Considering Arizona-Style Immigration Reform

With uncertainty surrounding immigration reform at the federal level, a growing number of immigration reform proposals are being made at the state level, many of which borrow measures from Arizona’s controversial SB 1070. Examples of recent immigration enforcement proposals include:

  • A group of Republican lawmakers in Colorado, some of whom traveled to Arizona to learn more about its approach to immigration legislation, are discussing what should be included in immigration-related bills to be introduced in early 2011. One bill is expected to require Colorado employers to use E-Verify.
  • In Florida, a senator has introduced a bill that would allow law enforcement officers—during a lawful detention or arrest—to ask for immigration documents if the officer suspects the detainee may be in the country illegally. The bill prohibits officers from using race as a reason for checking the detainee’s documentation.
  • In Nevada, an assembly member has asked the state’s Legislative Counsel Bureau to draft a bill based on Arizona’s SB 1070; another assembly member has requested a bill requiring state employers to use E-Verify.
  • Two senators in South Dakota are drafting a bill that would prohibit providing transportation or lodging to an individual known to be in the United States illegally. The bill also would prohibit illegal immigrants from asking for employment.
  • In California, proponents of an SB 1070-style initiative have started collecting signatures in an effort to put the initiative on the February or June 2012 ballot.

Although Arizona’s SB 1070 is the model for various immigration enforcement proposals in other states, the legality of SB 1070 is currently the subject of a challenge pending before the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Also, a recent report estimated that business boycotts of Arizona due to SB 1070 have cost the state as much as $141 million in revenue. Accordingly, it will not be surprising if other states, after considering the costs associated with enacting Arizona-style legislation, decline to take that path.

In addition, not all states are eager to expand their role in enforcing immigration laws. As reported by The Seattle Times, Washington state has declined to sign an agreement to participate in a federal program, Secure Communities, under which fingerprints of jailed individuals are checked against a national immigration database. Moreover, officials in two California cities (including San Francisco) have inquired into opting out of the program. The Secure Communities program has been implemented in 788 jurisdictions across 34 states. 

Some Businesses Are Reluctant to Use E-Verify

The Fresno Bee reports that some employers, particularly within the agriculture industry, will not use E-Verify, the federal electronic employment verification system, to authenticate new hires’ legal work status. Relying on figures provided by the federal government, the paper states that “[o]ut of thousands of businesses in Fresno, for example, only 179 use the program… although those numbers don't account for businesses that contract with personnel companies using the program.” Businesses cite two main reasons for their non-participation in E-Verify: (1) administrative burden; and (2) a shortage of available legal workers.

Administrative Burden

Businesses unwilling to use E-Verify often point to the associated administrative burden. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which runs E-Verify, acknowledges that simply preparing to use E-Verify requires between a few days to several months, depending on a business’s size and processes. Human resources staff must devote time to enrolling in the program, and learning how to use it (via DHS manuals or online tutorials). Conducting the verification process and addressing issues that arise if E-Verify finds an individual ineligible to work requires time and resources.

However, the risks of noncompliance are significant. As previously reported here, the current administration’s approach to immigration enforcement centers upon employer audits. In April 2009, DHS issued a fact sheet, which revised its Worksite Enforcement Strategy to strengthen its focus on employer noncompliance. Two months later, 652 businesses received Notices of Inspections from Immigration and Customs Enforcement; at the end of the year, in December 2009, 1,000 faced audits, and the trend continues in 2010. From October 2009 to July 2010, businesses in Texas alone were fined over $600,000.

Also, although federal law makes E-Verify mandatory only for federal contractors, an increasing number of state and local governments have passed laws mandating the use of E-Verify. These laws typically apply only to public employers and contractors, but some states and municipalities require private employers to use E-Verify. In certain states and municipalities with proposed or actual immigration-related laws, use of E-Verify benefits employers because it provides a good faith defense to hiring violations.

The Legal Workforce

The lack of an available and willing legal workforce is another justification companies put forth for not using E-Verify. As an agricultural employer told The Fresno Bee, “[E-Verify] may work for Costco, but Costco doesn't have the problem I have,” i.e., a legal workforce shortage. The United Farm Workers of America, a large agricultural workers union, recently ran a campaign called “Take Our Jobs” that challenged individuals with legal U.S. work status to take illegal immigrants’ positions working in the fields. As noted by The Hill, only seven individuals accepted the challenge, the most notable being Stephen Colbert of Comedy Central’s “The Colbert Report,” who testified (in character) about his experience before the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.

Farmers interviewed by The Fresno Bee stated their preference for a legal workforce, and some pending bills aim for this result. In October 2010, Senator Saxby Chambliss introduced a bill (S. 3912) that aims to provide a non-amnesty option for temporary agricultural workers and streamline the H-2A temporary worker program. The Menendez-Leahy comprehensive immigration reform bill seeks, among other things, to address shortcomings in existing worker programs that have led to undocumented migration.

Employers or individuals wanting to learn more about E-Verify can read Littler’s Insight, A Basic Guide to E-Verify and Related Immigration Compliance: Everything Federal Contractors and Others Need to Know to Comply with E-Verify Requirements, this blog’s E-Verify entries, or visit the DHS E-Verify page.

City of Santa Maria, California to Use E-Verify for New Hires

The city council of Santa Maria, California approved a measure to use E-Verify when it hires new employees, reports the Santa Maria Times. The city will commence a six-month trial of the federal electronic employee verification system on May 8, 2010. It is uncertain, however, how often the city will use E-Verify because it is currently furloughing employees to save money.

Some officials and residents supported mandating E-Verify for private businesses as well. However, full council support was lacking, and many community organizers and residents spoke against the proposal.

China: Government Officials Attempting to Curb Illegal Immigration in Guangdong Province

Global Times reports that government officials are working to combat illegal immigration in southern China’s Guangdong province, home to 57,800 permanent — and more than 1.14 million temporary — foreign residents. During the first half of 2009, almost one-third of foreigners visiting China entered or exited through the province.

Statistics indicate that almost 70% of foreigners employed or running businesses in Guangdong’s capital city, Guangzhou, do not possess legal permits. Moreover, local officials contend that there is a correlation between the rise in illegal immigration and increased criminal activity.

Guangdong officials are taking various steps to address the situation, such as intensifying efforts against foreigners’ illegal activities and setting up legal employment services for non-Chinese citizens. In 2010, a Law on Control of the Entry and Exit of Aliens will be submitted to the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress.

The City of Lancaster, California Will Require Businesses to Use E-Verify

Businesses in the southern California city of Lancaster will be required to use E-Verify to confirm new hires’ eligibility to legally work in the United States, according to the Los Angeles Times. Companies that fail to comply with the requirement could face revocation of their business license. At least 11,000 California business are already enrolled in the E-Verify program, which processed over 8.5 million queries in fiscal year 2009.

Illegal Immigrant Population Shifting to Different States

As reported at Stateline.org, a new report  finds that the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States are settling in states such as Georgia and North Carolina, where relatively few lived 20 years ago. The findings could have financial implications for already stressed state and local governments.

Highlights of the report, conducted by the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, include:

  • California leads the nation with 2.7 million illegal immigrants, but its share of the national total has dropped from 42% in 1990 to 22% in 2008. Instead, larger numbers of illegal immigrants are moving to states in the Southeast, Southwest, Mid-Atlantic, Midwest and Mountain regions.
  • Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, New York and Texas have retained their appeal to illegal immigrants.
  • The children of illegal immigrants comprise 6.8% of K-12 students in the U.S., up from 5.4% in 2003.
  • Six in 10 illegal immigrants lack health insurance, more than double the uninsured share among legal immigrants and four times the uninsured share among U.S.-born adults.
  • An estimated 8.3 million of the nation’s 154 million people in the labor force are illegal immigrants, according to 2008 estimates. That is a share of about 5.4%, up from 4.3% in 2003.

The Pew Hispanic Center periodically examines trends in the unauthorized immigrant population. State and local officials watch such trends carefully because state and local governments pay for the services provided to illegal immigrants, especially education, health care and public safety.