Filter By Service Area
Filter By Title
Filter By Office

Resources

From Construction Site to International Incident: the Hyundai ICE Raid, Form I-9, & E-Verify

Recently, over 400 workers were detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, at a Hyundai automobile factory in Georgia, which has had a ripple-effect on the company and throughout the automobile industry. As a result of this ICE raid, production of automobiles at Hyundai’s Georgia factory has been significantly delayed, driving up costs for Hyundai. The delay could also ultimately restrict the overall supply of new electric vehicles, drive would-be customers to competitors, and potentially increase prices for consumers.

As employers observe these developments, it is crucial to ensure their own businesses comply with applicable Federal (and possibly State and local) immigration laws that prohibit the employment of “unauthorized aliens,” i.e. individuals who lack proper authorization to work legally in the United States. Depending on an employer’s specific violation, it could face civil and criminal penalties due to hiring, recruiting or referring for a fee an undocumented worker.

Safe Harbor for Employers

To reduce the risk of hiring an undocumented worker, some employers voluntarily choose (or may be required by Federal or State law) to verify the status of employees through the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’ E-Verify system. Although Federal law does not require the use of E-Verify for all private employers, voluntary use of the E-Verify system provides some safe harbor protections to employers who choose to use it.

Also, if an employer is a Federal government contractor/subcontractor, it may be required to use E-Verify. State and local laws also may impose additional E-Verify requirements on employers operating outside of Louisiana, such as Mississippi, which requires private employers to use E-Verify.

In contrast, the Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, is mandatory for all employers. By completing an I-9, the employer attests under penalty of perjury that it reviewed acceptable documentation from the employee, which appear genuine, verify the employee’s identity, and show he is authorized to work in the United States. Additionally, these forms must be retained for a period of three years from the date of hire or one year after the date on which employment ends (whichever is later), and made available for inspection by authorities. An important purpose of these documents is not only to prevent violations of Federal immigration laws, but also to minimize potential employer liability by showing they complied with the law in good faith.

Different Kinds of Warrants that May Be Used in ICE Raids

There are two kinds of warrants that are frequently used by ICE in immigration raids similar to the raid in Georgia, and they give ICE differing levels of authority to conduct searches: judicial (court-issued) warrants and administrative warrants. It is crucial for employers to know the difference between the two.

An administrative warrant is not issued by a court, but rather by the Department of Homeland Security. As such, it lacks independent judicial review and does not grant authority to enter constitutionally protected private areas (i.e., areas not accessible to the general public). A judicial warrant, on the other hand, is issued by a court and may allow entry into constitutionally protected areas, as detailed in the warrant. Judicial warrants typically limit the scope of entry in several ways, including restrictions on time, place, and duration.

The landscape of the United States’ immigration system is in a constant state of flux. Each situation is unique and involves varying levels of legal complexity, so employers should consult with their labor and employment counsel to obtain legal advice tailored to their situation, ensure compliance with the law including I-9 compliance, and to prepare for possible interactions with ICE.

From Construction Site to International Incident: the Hyundai ICE Raid, Form I-9, & E-Verify

Recently, over 400 workers were detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, at a Hyundai automobile factory in Georgia, which has had a ripple-effect on the company and throughout the automobile industry. As a result of this ICE raid, production of automobiles at Hyundai’s Georgia factory has been significantly delayed, driving up costs for Hyundai. The delay could also ultimately restrict the overall supply of new electric vehicles, drive would-be customers to competitors, and potentially increase prices for consumers.

As employers observe these developments, it is crucial to ensure their own businesses comply with applicable Federal (and possibly State and local) immigration laws that prohibit the employment of “unauthorized aliens,” i.e. individuals who lack proper authorization to work legally in the United States. Depending on an employer’s specific violation, it could face civil and criminal penalties due to hiring, recruiting or referring for a fee an undocumented worker.

Safe Harbor for Employers

To reduce the risk of hiring an undocumented worker, some employers voluntarily choose (or may be required by Federal or State law) to verify the status of employees through the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’ E-Verify system. Although Federal law does not require the use of E-Verify for all private employers, voluntary use of the E-Verify system provides some safe harbor protections to employers who choose to use it.

Also, if an employer is a Federal government contractor/subcontractor, it may be required to use E-Verify. State and local laws also may impose additional E-Verify requirements on employers operating outside of Louisiana, such as Mississippi, which requires private employers to use E-Verify.

In contrast, the Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, is mandatory for all employers. By completing an I-9, the employer attests under penalty of perjury that it reviewed acceptable documentation from the employee, which appear genuine, verify the employee’s identity, and show he is authorized to work in the United States. Additionally, these forms must be retained for a period of three years from the date of hire or one year after the date on which employment ends (whichever is later), and made available for inspection by authorities. An important purpose of these documents is not only to prevent violations of Federal immigration laws, but also to minimize potential employer liability by showing they complied with the law in good faith.

Different Kinds of Warrants that May Be Used in ICE Raids

There are two kinds of warrants that are frequently used by ICE in immigration raids similar to the raid in Georgia, and they give ICE differing levels of authority to conduct searches: judicial (court-issued) warrants and administrative warrants. It is crucial for employers to know the difference between the two.

An administrative warrant is not issued by a court, but rather by the Department of Homeland Security. As such, it lacks independent judicial review and does not grant authority to enter constitutionally protected private areas (i.e., areas not accessible to the general public). A judicial warrant, on the other hand, is issued by a court and may allow entry into constitutionally protected areas, as detailed in the warrant. Judicial warrants typically limit the scope of entry in several ways, including restrictions on time, place, and duration.

The landscape of the United States’ immigration system is in a constant state of flux. Each situation is unique and involves varying levels of legal complexity, so employers should consult with their labor and employment counsel to obtain legal advice tailored to their situation, ensure compliance with the law including I-9 compliance, and to prepare for possible interactions with ICE.

From Construction Site to International Incident: the Hyundai ICE Raid, Form I-9, & E-Verify

Recently, over 400 workers were detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, at a Hyundai automobile factory in Georgia, which has had a ripple-effect on the company and throughout the automobile industry. As a result of this ICE raid, production of automobiles at Hyundai’s Georgia factory has been significantly delayed, driving up costs for Hyundai. The delay could also ultimately restrict the overall supply of new electric vehicles, drive would-be customers to competitors, and potentially increase prices for consumers.

As employers observe these developments, it is crucial to ensure their own businesses comply with applicable Federal (and possibly State and local) immigration laws that prohibit the employment of “unauthorized aliens,” i.e. individuals who lack proper authorization to work legally in the United States. Depending on an employer’s specific violation, it could face civil and criminal penalties due to hiring, recruiting or referring for a fee an undocumented worker.

Safe Harbor for Employers

To reduce the risk of hiring an undocumented worker, some employers voluntarily choose (or may be required by Federal or State law) to verify the status of employees through the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’ E-Verify system. Although Federal law does not require the use of E-Verify for all private employers, voluntary use of the E-Verify system provides some safe harbor protections to employers who choose to use it.

Also, if an employer is a Federal government contractor/subcontractor, it may be required to use E-Verify. State and local laws also may impose additional E-Verify requirements on employers operating outside of Louisiana, such as Mississippi, which requires private employers to use E-Verify.

In contrast, the Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, is mandatory for all employers. By completing an I-9, the employer attests under penalty of perjury that it reviewed acceptable documentation from the employee, which appear genuine, verify the employee’s identity, and show he is authorized to work in the United States. Additionally, these forms must be retained for a period of three years from the date of hire or one year after the date on which employment ends (whichever is later), and made available for inspection by authorities. An important purpose of these documents is not only to prevent violations of Federal immigration laws, but also to minimize potential employer liability by showing they complied with the law in good faith.

Different Kinds of Warrants that May Be Used in ICE Raids

There are two kinds of warrants that are frequently used by ICE in immigration raids similar to the raid in Georgia, and they give ICE differing levels of authority to conduct searches: judicial (court-issued) warrants and administrative warrants. It is crucial for employers to know the difference between the two.

An administrative warrant is not issued by a court, but rather by the Department of Homeland Security. As such, it lacks independent judicial review and does not grant authority to enter constitutionally protected private areas (i.e., areas not accessible to the general public). A judicial warrant, on the other hand, is issued by a court and may allow entry into constitutionally protected areas, as detailed in the warrant. Judicial warrants typically limit the scope of entry in several ways, including restrictions on time, place, and duration.

The landscape of the United States’ immigration system is in a constant state of flux. Each situation is unique and involves varying levels of legal complexity, so employers should consult with their labor and employment counsel to obtain legal advice tailored to their situation, ensure compliance with the law including I-9 compliance, and to prepare for possible interactions with ICE.

From Construction Site to International Incident: the Hyundai ICE Raid, Form I-9, & E-Verify

Recently, over 400 workers were detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, at a Hyundai automobile factory in Georgia, which has had a ripple-effect on the company and throughout the automobile industry. As a result of this ICE raid, production of automobiles at Hyundai’s Georgia factory has been significantly delayed, driving up costs for Hyundai. The delay could also ultimately restrict the overall supply of new electric vehicles, drive would-be customers to competitors, and potentially increase prices for consumers.

As employers observe these developments, it is crucial to ensure their own businesses comply with applicable Federal (and possibly State and local) immigration laws that prohibit the employment of “unauthorized aliens,” i.e. individuals who lack proper authorization to work legally in the United States. Depending on an employer’s specific violation, it could face civil and criminal penalties due to hiring, recruiting or referring for a fee an undocumented worker.

Safe Harbor for Employers

To reduce the risk of hiring an undocumented worker, some employers voluntarily choose (or may be required by Federal or State law) to verify the status of employees through the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’ E-Verify system. Although Federal law does not require the use of E-Verify for all private employers, voluntary use of the E-Verify system provides some safe harbor protections to employers who choose to use it.

Also, if an employer is a Federal government contractor/subcontractor, it may be required to use E-Verify. State and local laws also may impose additional E-Verify requirements on employers operating outside of Louisiana, such as Mississippi, which requires private employers to use E-Verify.

In contrast, the Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, is mandatory for all employers. By completing an I-9, the employer attests under penalty of perjury that it reviewed acceptable documentation from the employee, which appear genuine, verify the employee’s identity, and show he is authorized to work in the United States. Additionally, these forms must be retained for a period of three years from the date of hire or one year after the date on which employment ends (whichever is later), and made available for inspection by authorities. An important purpose of these documents is not only to prevent violations of Federal immigration laws, but also to minimize potential employer liability by showing they complied with the law in good faith.

Different Kinds of Warrants that May Be Used in ICE Raids

There are two kinds of warrants that are frequently used by ICE in immigration raids similar to the raid in Georgia, and they give ICE differing levels of authority to conduct searches: judicial (court-issued) warrants and administrative warrants. It is crucial for employers to know the difference between the two.

An administrative warrant is not issued by a court, but rather by the Department of Homeland Security. As such, it lacks independent judicial review and does not grant authority to enter constitutionally protected private areas (i.e., areas not accessible to the general public). A judicial warrant, on the other hand, is issued by a court and may allow entry into constitutionally protected areas, as detailed in the warrant. Judicial warrants typically limit the scope of entry in several ways, including restrictions on time, place, and duration.

The landscape of the United States’ immigration system is in a constant state of flux. Each situation is unique and involves varying levels of legal complexity, so employers should consult with their labor and employment counsel to obtain legal advice tailored to their situation, ensure compliance with the law including I-9 compliance, and to prepare for possible interactions with ICE.

From Construction Site to International Incident: the Hyundai ICE Raid, Form I-9, & E-Verify

Recently, over 400 workers were detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, at a Hyundai automobile factory in Georgia, which has had a ripple-effect on the company and throughout the automobile industry. As a result of this ICE raid, production of automobiles at Hyundai’s Georgia factory has been significantly delayed, driving up costs for Hyundai. The delay could also ultimately restrict the overall supply of new electric vehicles, drive would-be customers to competitors, and potentially increase prices for consumers.

As employers observe these developments, it is crucial to ensure their own businesses comply with applicable Federal (and possibly State and local) immigration laws that prohibit the employment of “unauthorized aliens,” i.e. individuals who lack proper authorization to work legally in the United States. Depending on an employer’s specific violation, it could face civil and criminal penalties due to hiring, recruiting or referring for a fee an undocumented worker.

Safe Harbor for Employers

To reduce the risk of hiring an undocumented worker, some employers voluntarily choose (or may be required by Federal or State law) to verify the status of employees through the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’ E-Verify system. Although Federal law does not require the use of E-Verify for all private employers, voluntary use of the E-Verify system provides some safe harbor protections to employers who choose to use it.

Also, if an employer is a Federal government contractor/subcontractor, it may be required to use E-Verify. State and local laws also may impose additional E-Verify requirements on employers operating outside of Louisiana, such as Mississippi, which requires private employers to use E-Verify.

In contrast, the Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, is mandatory for all employers. By completing an I-9, the employer attests under penalty of perjury that it reviewed acceptable documentation from the employee, which appear genuine, verify the employee’s identity, and show he is authorized to work in the United States. Additionally, these forms must be retained for a period of three years from the date of hire or one year after the date on which employment ends (whichever is later), and made available for inspection by authorities. An important purpose of these documents is not only to prevent violations of Federal immigration laws, but also to minimize potential employer liability by showing they complied with the law in good faith.

Different Kinds of Warrants that May Be Used in ICE Raids

There are two kinds of warrants that are frequently used by ICE in immigration raids similar to the raid in Georgia, and they give ICE differing levels of authority to conduct searches: judicial (court-issued) warrants and administrative warrants. It is crucial for employers to know the difference between the two.

An administrative warrant is not issued by a court, but rather by the Department of Homeland Security. As such, it lacks independent judicial review and does not grant authority to enter constitutionally protected private areas (i.e., areas not accessible to the general public). A judicial warrant, on the other hand, is issued by a court and may allow entry into constitutionally protected areas, as detailed in the warrant. Judicial warrants typically limit the scope of entry in several ways, including restrictions on time, place, and duration.

The landscape of the United States’ immigration system is in a constant state of flux. Each situation is unique and involves varying levels of legal complexity, so employers should consult with their labor and employment counsel to obtain legal advice tailored to their situation, ensure compliance with the law including I-9 compliance, and to prepare for possible interactions with ICE.

From Construction Site to International Incident: the Hyundai ICE Raid, Form I-9, & E-Verify

Recently, over 400 workers were detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, at a Hyundai automobile factory in Georgia, which has had a ripple-effect on the company and throughout the automobile industry. As a result of this ICE raid, production of automobiles at Hyundai’s Georgia factory has been significantly delayed, driving up costs for Hyundai. The delay could also ultimately restrict the overall supply of new electric vehicles, drive would-be customers to competitors, and potentially increase prices for consumers.

As employers observe these developments, it is crucial to ensure their own businesses comply with applicable Federal (and possibly State and local) immigration laws that prohibit the employment of “unauthorized aliens,” i.e. individuals who lack proper authorization to work legally in the United States. Depending on an employer’s specific violation, it could face civil and criminal penalties due to hiring, recruiting or referring for a fee an undocumented worker.

Safe Harbor for Employers

To reduce the risk of hiring an undocumented worker, some employers voluntarily choose (or may be required by Federal or State law) to verify the status of employees through the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’ E-Verify system. Although Federal law does not require the use of E-Verify for all private employers, voluntary use of the E-Verify system provides some safe harbor protections to employers who choose to use it.

Also, if an employer is a Federal government contractor/subcontractor, it may be required to use E-Verify. State and local laws also may impose additional E-Verify requirements on employers operating outside of Louisiana, such as Mississippi, which requires private employers to use E-Verify.

In contrast, the Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, is mandatory for all employers. By completing an I-9, the employer attests under penalty of perjury that it reviewed acceptable documentation from the employee, which appear genuine, verify the employee’s identity, and show he is authorized to work in the United States. Additionally, these forms must be retained for a period of three years from the date of hire or one year after the date on which employment ends (whichever is later), and made available for inspection by authorities. An important purpose of these documents is not only to prevent violations of Federal immigration laws, but also to minimize potential employer liability by showing they complied with the law in good faith.

Different Kinds of Warrants that May Be Used in ICE Raids

There are two kinds of warrants that are frequently used by ICE in immigration raids similar to the raid in Georgia, and they give ICE differing levels of authority to conduct searches: judicial (court-issued) warrants and administrative warrants. It is crucial for employers to know the difference between the two.

An administrative warrant is not issued by a court, but rather by the Department of Homeland Security. As such, it lacks independent judicial review and does not grant authority to enter constitutionally protected private areas (i.e., areas not accessible to the general public). A judicial warrant, on the other hand, is issued by a court and may allow entry into constitutionally protected areas, as detailed in the warrant. Judicial warrants typically limit the scope of entry in several ways, including restrictions on time, place, and duration.

The landscape of the United States’ immigration system is in a constant state of flux. Each situation is unique and involves varying levels of legal complexity, so employers should consult with their labor and employment counsel to obtain legal advice tailored to their situation, ensure compliance with the law including I-9 compliance, and to prepare for possible interactions with ICE.