The Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Rule on the Social Security No Match notice remains the subject of litigation. A federal judge in San Francisco has delayed its implementation, stating that if the rule were to take effect, it would result in “irreparable harm to innocent workers and employers” and therefore there should be a full hearing on whether DHS had failed to follow proper procedures for issuing a new rule. In particular, the rule would force employers to fire employees within a 90-day period. Consequently, the rule is on hold pending the outcome of the case or appeal. If enforced, the rule would also have unintended negative consequences for the New Jersey’s economy. If enforced, it would require employers to fire undocumented workers, making it the weapon that could finally make a dent against illegal immigration. But it’s a mistake to believe that it will be good for the economy if a million undocumented workers were forced to leave the state’s labor force. State officials have no authority to deport undocumented workers so the likely outcome of mass firings of undocumented workers would be a thriving underground economy.
This entry was posted
on Monday, December 17th, 2007 at 2:06 pm and is filed under Immigration.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
December 18th, 2007 at 10:24 am
Even though immigration control is an exclusive function of the federal government, some local efforts are beginning to explore ways to make an end-run around the US Constitution. An Arizona statute, which is currently subject to a constitutional challenge, encourages people to report employers who employ undocumented workers to the county sheriff. Under the law, the sheriff’s department conducts an investigation and makes a recommendation to the county attorney for penalites, which could include the revocation of the firm’s license to conduct business.
A University of Arizona study reports that two-thirds of foreign born residents in the state are illegal aliens. If they were removed from the economy, the study warns, statewide output would drop 8.2% annually.
December 18th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
Employers face uncalculated exposure to productivity loss and unstructured punitive action until there is a federal policy established to level the employment of immigrant workers throughout the USA. State by state (and local) attempts to define policy only aggravate the cost of compliance when regional policy is shaped by local reaction and appeasement of specific and regional concerns, often on an emotional public level. If a cause of the problem is the need to satisfy a workforce deficit, let’s support real federal effort to “legalize” the process to fulfill this need.
February 10th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
On February 8th, a federal judge upheld the Arizona law that prohibits employers from knowingly hiring undocumented workers and revokes business licenses as a penalty for repeated offenses.
Opponents argued that federal law preempts state laws that seek to regulate immigration.
The court held, however, that the Arizona law does not attempt to determine who can be a citizen and instead regulates business licenses in a permissable way.