South Carolina is one of the few states with E-Verify requirements that permits employers to accept a drivers license as an alternative. But it has to be a drivers license with certain security measures and only about 20 states meet the test. And employers say that it's pretty worthless not to use E-Verify if there's any chance you'll want to hire an employee from one of the other 30 states since you'll end up having to sign up for E-Verify anyway.

North Carolina Blue Dog Democrat Heath Shuler has re-introduced his mandatory E-Verify bill. The bill's main focus would be to mandate the use of E-Verify for all employers in the US. Now called HR 3308, the chances of this bill passing on its own are nil, but its provisions could be incorporated in to a comprehensive immigration plan as part of a grand bargain on the future of immigration policy.

The Immigration Policy Center opines on what goes in to the recipe for a good electronic verification system.

Federal Computer Week reports on yesterday's House hearings on E-Verify and highlighting testimony on identity theft. Unless the photo tool is dramatically expanded, in most cases, E-Verify will not help in cases where an individual is presenting documents that belong to someone else.

The Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization and Procurement of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a hearing yesterday entitled "E-Verify: Challenges and Opportunities." The witnesses included Angelo Amador from the US Chamber of Commerce, David Rust from the Social Security Administration, Gerri Ratliff from USCIS and Jena Baker McNeill from the conservative Heritage Foundation. The links to the testimony are below.

Angelo Amador
David Rust
Gerri Ratliff
Jena Baker McNeill

Here are the prepared statements from last Tuesday's Senate Immigration Subcommittee hearing on E-Verify.

Congressman Luis Gutierrez
Michael Aytes of USCIS
James Ziglar of the Migration Policy Institute
Lynden Melmed of Berry, Appleman and Leiden
Senator Russ Feingold

From The Greenville News:

The Columbia Farms subsidiary of the House of Raeford was indicted by a federal grand jury on charges that it knowingly employed illegal immigrants at its Greenville chicken processing plant.

The company was indicted on 29 counts and accused of knowingly hiring illegal workers beginning in 2000.

Two company managers — human resources manager Elaine Crump and plant complex manager Barry Cronic — were previously named in the indictment and accused of encouraging employees to use falsified immigration verification documents, according to the indictment.

Both managers have pleaded not guilty.

House of Raeford, the North Carolina-based parent company of Columbia Farms, said Columbia Farms has followed all federal laws.

The indictment is here:


SC indictment -

A new film explores the massive Swift meatpacking raids from a few years back as well as the wider immigration reform impact.

The Migration Policy Institute has issued a report reviewing E-Verify and making recommendations on improvements to the program. A few highlights:

The central recommendations of this report are that in making electronic
verification mandatory for all employers as part of comprehensive immigration
reform, Congress and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) should:

• Authorize testing several new voluntary pilots for a next-generation E-Verify
system that would reduce employer guesswork and reliably authenticate the
identity of newly hired workers; and

• Take immediate steps to strengthen the existing E-Verify system.

*****

The report recommends three sets of reforms that are urgently needed to
strengthen the effectiveness, performance, and stakeholder support for the
existing E-Verify:

• Strengthen due-process protections and compensate workers when system
errors result in thewrongful termination of US citizens and other legal
workers — steps that would beparticularly important with a mandatory
employment verification mandate that would result inthe checks of millions
of workers, native and foreign born, each year;

• Strengthen enforcement of worker protections and employer penalties,
training, and oversight; and

• Monitor E-Verify compliance and strengthen auditing to identify patterns
of misuse, selectivescreening, identity fraud, and off-the-books employment. An
effective, up-and-runningmonitoring and compliance unit must be a top DHS priority.

MPI E-VERIFY report -

The Senate Immigration Subcommittee is holding a hearing on July 21st at 2 pm eastern time entitled "Ensuirng a Legal Workforce: What Changes Should be Made to Our Current Employment Verification System?" No witnesses have been announced yet, though the hearing's web page will likely be updated when we know. Also, you can view the hearing via webcast from the hearing page.

The Wall Street Journal takes the Obama Administration to task for focusing immigration policy on more employer enforcement:

The broader issue is that the Obama Administration, like its predecessor, has accepted the premise that the key to curbing illegal immigration is a crackdown on employers. That premise is false. Our illegal workforce results from a government policy that severely limits foreign access to U.S. labor markets.

Illegal immigration to the U.S. has been falling primarily because the economic downturn has reduced demand for labor. Last year net migration from Mexico fell by half. But as our economy inevitably revives, so will domestic demand for foreign workers. If the Obama Administration and Congress want to prevent another spike in the undocumented population, they might use the current lull to lift the immigration quotas that drive illegal border crossings. What U.S. employers need is legal access to willing workers, not more red tape in the form of a federal worker-verification system.

Sources are telling us that OMB is reviewing a proposed rule from USCIS that will require notice and comment once it is published. It is still not clear whether the agency can beat the September 30th deadline resulting from the Vitter Amendment.

A six month hold on proceedings in the E-Verify contractor lawsuit is now being lifted in the wake of the Obama Administration's announcement that they will proceed with implementing the rule. According to Tracker I-9's blog,

The Court is now resuming its case schedule as follows:

July 27, 2009: The Government must file their combined opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and cross-motion for summary judgment;

August 3, 2009: Plaintiffs must file their combined opposition to the Government’s cross-motion for summary judgment and reply brief;

August 10, 2009: The Government must file its reply brief;

August 28, 2009: The Court will hold a hearing on any pending motions.

The big unknown right now is whether a provision in the Senate version of the DHS spending bill will make it in to the final version. Senator Session's Amendment on E-Verify codifies the contractor rule and is essentially confirmation of Congress' intent. If this provision stays in the final version of the spending package that goes to the White House, the plaintiffs in the case will certainly have a weakened hand.

The Senate has just passed by a voice vote an amendment introduced by Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) that will allow employers using E-Verify to run existing employees through the system in addition to new hires. Current law only permits running new hires through the system.

Earlier today, I mentioned this provision which would bar DHS from using funds to delay or rescind the no-match rule. The amendment passed by a voice vote, but in consulting with a knowledgeable source, it seems likely that the amendment will not have much affect. That's because it bars DHS from using funds from its 2010 budget for this purpose. As long as DHS rescinds the rule before September 30th (which now seems likely given yesterday's DHS announcement), no 2010 funds would be needed to achieve this result. So I would not count on the no-match letter being resurrected any time soon.

Just hours after the announcement that DHS will seek to rescind the controversial social security no-match rule, the Senate may consider an amendment to the DHS spending bill that has been introduced by Senator David Vitter (R-LA). Amendment 1375 would bar DHS from revoking the rule and require its implementation. The amendment language is as follows:

Sec. 556. None of the amounts made available under this Act may be used to--

(1) amend, rewrite, or change the final rule requiring Federal Contractors to use E-Verify (promulgated on November 14, 2008);

(2) further delay the implementation of the rule described in paragraph (1) beyond September 8, 2009; or

(3) amend, rewrite, change, or delay the implementation of the final rule describing the process for employers to follow after receiving a ``no match'' letter in order to qualify for ``safe harbor'' status (promulgated on August 15, 2007).

The first two sections are basically moot since the White House announced their support yesterday for the contractor rule. The third item is the one that is at issue.

In short, the E-Verify federal contractor rule lives and the no-match rule dies.

The E-Verify contractor rule and the no-match rules were released in the tail end of the Bush Administration. The E-Verify rule would require most major federal contractors to use E-Verify in order to qualify for their contracts. The no-match rule covered situations where employers received letters from the Social Security Administration notifying them that employees social security numbers do not match their names. The rule outlined specific procedures for employers to follow after receiving such letters and the penalty for not following the procedures is a potential finding of knowingly hiring unauthorized workers.

Both rules have been blocked from implementation due to litigation. The Obama Administration needed to determine whether it wished to fight for either or both rules and today's press release from Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano made clear that the Administration will only fight for the contractor rule. A key sticking point in the litigation has been whether the rule's application of E-Verify to existing employees of a contractor should be permitted or whether only new employees should be put through the system. I have been told by insiders that a compromise on this issue was near, but this press release does not indicate whether a deal has been struck with the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

The press release says the White House is seeking implementation of the contractor rule beginning on September 8th.

ICE didn't include a list of businesses being audited in its big push, but some local reporters are getting the details. Here is one example.

The National Conference of State Legislatures has added a new E-Verify page to its web site.

Another major corporation gets nailed after an I-9 audit.

Last July, Mississippi employers with more than 250 employees had to begin using E-Verify. Starting this week, employers with 100 or more employees must be using the system.

The White House made a big point of saying that it was now focusing on targeting employers through investigations like the announcement from yesterday regarding the audits of hundreds of employers. The Wall Street Journal reports on the I-9 audits, but one person interviewed for the story notes that audits like this have the same ultimate effect on immigrant workers:

While the new enforcement approach isn't set up to trigger immediate deportations, it is still likely to unsettle immigrant communities.

"The net effect for workers is nearly the same: They lose their economic lifeline. They may not be deported but they may have to relocate," said Craig J. Regelbrugge, the co-chair of Agriculture Coalition for Immigration Reform, an association of agricultural producers.

Former AILA president Chuck Kuck praises ICE for ramping up I-9 audits, but criticizes how difficult the I-9 system is for employers.

If anyone doubts Secretary Napolitano was serious when she talked about ICE going after employers through investigations, they'll likely be convinced by this press release:

ICE I-9 Audit campaign -

American Apparel, Inc. which owns boutique clothing stores around the US, has revealed that it has been notified by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") that ICE has not been able to verify the employment authorization of 200 employees because of employment records discrepancies and that 1,600 other employees do not appear to be authorized to work in the US.

ICE audited American Apparel in January 2008. The company states that ICE's notification does not contain any allegation that the company knowingly or intentionally hired unauthorized workers.

The company has stated that it will terminate employees who are unable to document their work authorization within a reasonable time frame. Because of the economic downturn, the company has indicated that they do not believe the loss of some or all of these employees would have a materially adverse impact on its bottom line.

April 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
December 2008
January 2009
February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
May 2009
June 2009
July 2009
August 2009
September 2009
October 2009
November 2009
December 2009
January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
August 2011
September 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
February 2012
March 2012
April 2012
May 2012
September 2012
December 2012
April 2014