Working Immigrants

The very informative Siskind Immigration Bulletin issued this informative analysis of laws going into effect 1/1/08. I have posted on the Arizona law but not the Tennessee law so far. Siskind writes,” The Arizona and Tennessee rules are similar in sanctioning employers who violate immigration laws with the revocation of their business licenses. This punishment is seemingly much more serious than the federal punishment of a fine since loss of a business license is really the death penalty for a business….2008 is likely to be a year of considerably more enforcement against employers violating immigration laws and we intend to cover the issue in great depth.”
The analysis:
On January 1st, employers in Arizona and Tennessee will begin having to comply with controversial new immigration laws that make those states enforcers of immigration law right along with the federal government. Whether state and local governments have the legal right to be doing this is the subject of many court battles around the country since the Founding Fathers clearly gave Congress the sole authority to regulate immigration. But with a Congress seemingly paralyzed in its attempts to get a handle on immigration policy and with 1400 bills pending around the country, the new reality is that employers will need to comply with a whole new set of laws on top of the existing federal rules.
The Arizona and Tennessee rules are similar in sanctioning employers who violate immigration laws with the revocation of their business licenses. This punishment is seemingly much more serious than the federal punishment of a fine since loss of a business license is really the death penalty for a business. Both rules provide a defense if employers have been complying with I-9 rules. Tennessee provides an additional safe harbor if employers have used the new E-Verify electronic employment verification system. Arizona goes a step further in actually mandating that all employers use E-Verify. This will represent a major expansion in the number of employers using E-Verify and it is far from clear whether the E-Verify system can handle the additional load. A recent report commissioned by the DHS itself noted that there is an unacceptable false positive rate and that as many as 10% of naturalized citizens show up in the E-Verify as being unauthorized to work.
Employers in Arizona had fought the new law and had been attempting to keep it from taking effect on the 1st. However, a judge has just denied an injunction order and the law will, in fact, take effect. An injunction is still holding in another measure aimed at employers – DHS’ social security number no match rule. DHS’ rule would sanction employers who are notified that their employees’ social security numbers and names do not match. One of the key issues in that case is also the high rate of false findings in the Social Security Administration database and the inability of that agency to resolve questions in a timely manner. However, DHS is promising to re-release a modified rule any day now that would attempt to meet the objections of the judge.
2008 is likely to be a year of considerably more enforcement against employers violating immigration laws and we intend to cover the issue in great depth.
To all of our readers around the world, all of us here at Siskind, Susser, Bland wish you all a year of peace, happiness and good health.
Regards,
Greg Siskind

Arizona’s draconian measures to root out illegal labor are the subject of this editorial on 12/18 by the New York Times. “On Jan. 1, Arizona intends to become the first state to try to muscle its way out of its immigration problems on its own. That is when, barring a last-minute setback in court, it is to begin enforcing a new state law that harshly punishes businesses that knowingly hire undocumented immigrants. It is a two-strike law, suspending a business’s license on the first offense and revoking it on the second. It is the strictest workplace-enforcement law in the country.” — and today’s papers (12/20) say that immigration is the most important topic among voters in Iowa.
The editorial goes on….
We have always said that workplace laws should be enforced vigorously — as part of a comprehensive, nationwide immigration system that doesn’t just punish, but tries to actually solve the problems that foster and sustain the breaking of immigration laws. The boosters of the Arizona law, including the Minutemen border vigilantes who have made “January First!” an anti-immigrant rallying cry, have a much narrower goal: the biggest purge of illegal immigrants in the Southwest since the federal government’s Operation Wetback in 1954.
If that happens, the immigrants will take a big chunk of Arizona’s growth and economic vitality with them — and not necessarily back across the international border. The collateral damage will be severe as citizens and legal immigrants are also thrown out of work, as businesses struggle to find workers in a state with a 3.3 percent unemployment rate and as sleazy employers move more workers off the books, the better to abuse and exploit them. And the national problem of undocumented immigration will be no closer to a solution.
There are many compassion-and-common-sense criticisms of Arizona’s Fair and Legal Employment Act: stories about families torn apart, breadwinners deported and citizen children on public assistance. They make little headway with the law-and-order crowd. Nor does the fact that many hard-line defenders of workplace enforcement show a lopsided devotion to federal laws; they seldom complain when employers abuse undocumented immigrants and steal their wages, even though those violations worsen job conditions and pay for American workers, too.
For now, let’s just point out that Arizona’s plunge into enforcement-only immigration policy highlights the folly and inadequacy of that approach, particularly when it is left to a crazy quilt of state laws. America is a country where millions of illegal immigrants have entered for years all but invited and mostly not pursued. They have become integral to our economy, although now — thanks to harsher enforcement and the defeat of comprehensive immigration reform in Congress — most have no way to become legal, no options except slipping back into destitution on the other side of the border.
There is no way for Arizona or any other state to get businesses back on a legal footing without exacting a great economic and human toll.
It could be that Arizona’s enforcement of the law will be calm and measured. But we worry about Maricopa County, which includes Phoenix and two-thirds of the state’s population. Maricopa’s county attorney, Andrew Thomas, and county sheriff, Joe Arpaio, are prone to media-driven stunts. Sheriff Arpaio makes a show of his meanness, hounding and humiliating prisoners and forming his deputies into squads that check people’s clothes and accents before demanding their papers.
Arizona is home to many moderate politicians, like Gov. Janet Napolitano, who were all too aware of the bill’s problems, and yet it became law. Many say the Minutemen and their allies had offered an ultimatum: approve this bill or face a citizen’s initiative on the 2008 ballot that would be even harsher and blunter, and all but impossible to repair. That promise was reneged on; petitions for the Minutemen’s initiative are being collected now.
As Arizona exacts its punishment on the undocumented workers who have made it so prosperous, it runs the risk of proving itself tough but not smart.