Court: E-Verify requirement is OK
September 3, 2009 by Sam NarisiPosted in: Employment law, HR Tech, Immigration, In this week's e-newsletter - Tech, Latest News & Views
A legal battle ensued over the feds’ attempts to require some employers to use E-Verify. The feds won.
For more than a year, some members of the government have been trying to make E-Verify mandatory for federal contractors (President Bush signed the first order in June 2008). But the effective date of the rule has been consistently pushed back, as business groups challenged the requirement.
For now, it looks like the most recently announced effective date of September 8 will stand.
A coalition led by the Chamber of Commerce sued to have the rule stopped permanently, but a federal court recently threw out the case.
The suit argued that Congresses authorized E-Verify as a voluntary program. But the court ruled that the requirement only affects businesses that enter into contracts with the government, which is a “voluntary choice.”
September 3rd, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Finding out about E-Verification, 287 G local police arrest , No-Match-Letters, 1986 Simpson/Mazzoli bill, and other immigration enforcement laws, the reader should GOOGLE–NUMBERSUSA and JUDICIAL WATCH? Here you will find the absolute truth and not the meandering propaganda addressed by the special interest lobbyists or the deceiving national press. We can burying the head in the proverbial sand, or do something to save your quality of life in our nation. E-Verify from the beginning has been demonized, and only bloggers like me brought its operation to gain national attention? IT WORKS! So without public outcry, the bill would have ended up in a dusty draw of the Senate. Now–these same people are out to crush 287 G, because it also works
After federal training local police have the authority to check a persons identity and detain them for ICE. President Obama is currently being pressured to rescind the no-match-letter. A immigration tool that notifies employers of discrepancies in a persons identity, for a right to be employed. Sen. Edward Kennedy was a major sponsor of the 1986 (IRCA) immigration act, that weakened importation allowing cheap labor into our country, including the fact he promised–NO MORE AMNESTIES.
America has no chance of passing a worthwhile public option for health care, because we will also be paying for illegal aliens along with their families. The bill has no restriction in the wording to authenticate a persons legal status. Personally, I want a single payer system to stop the profiteering by insurance companies, but I don’t want to be taxed for underwriting illegal immigrants and their families? Even if they add an amendment declining illegal immigrants from the health care bill, they will still be included if the Democrats enact another path to citizenship? Then what about the others on the opposite side of our weak fence, they will hear the Amnesty bell chiming and rush for the border, or enter as tourists in an airport. I repeat we cannot even look after our own impoverished and homeless, even many veterans live under bridges. Pandering to foreign nationals legislators have ignored our aging infrastructure, our bridges, roads and tunnels.
Call up the politicians you voted for at 202-224-3121 and tell them NO MORE AMNESTIES!. YES TO A PERMANENT E-VERIFY! BUILD THE ORIGINAL TWO-TIER FENCE! ENFORCE THE 1986 (IRCA) IMMIGRATION LAW THAT’S ON THE BOOKS. DON’T OVERPOPULATE AMERICA!
September 9th, 2009 at 10:06 am
Well said Brittancus! The situation will never get better if Americans don’t take a stand!
September 10th, 2009 at 10:43 am
NO MORE SUPPORT FOR ILLEGALS! (and I don’t even CARE if they don’t like being called that!) Politicians ignore the fact that ‘illegals’ are draining this country. They are NOT contributing by paying their taxes – that’s a lie. I am a legal immigrant from Canada and I feel that they can learn the language and become legal citizens or get out of our country! I’m sick of supporting them and all of their families. If we had all of the money to do it, fine – but it’s obvious that we don’t so they need to respect OUR rights as citizens!
October 20th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
We’ll begin a new contract next month. This will be the first contract since the E-verify law. Our field crew and all other employees working on that job are not new hires. They’re I-9 and supporting documents have been on file since they began employment with us. Will I need to E-verify them or is it only applying to new employees that will be working on the project contracted with the gov’t?