Category: Department of Homeland Security


States Continue to Carve Out Piecemeal Immigration Law and Policy in Absence of Federal Approach

August 22nd, 2011 — 10:15am

State and local governments continue to be the staging ground for real action on immigration reform while Congress does nothing. Conservative state legislatures have enacted draconian, restrictive immigration laws (Arizona, Alabama, Utah, Georgia, and South Carolina) that, in some cases, are winding their way through the courts, while other states have moved in the direction of enacting more liberal policies toward immigrants. Most recently, the governors of Illinois and California signed into law “DREAM Act” bills that would allow undocumented immigrants to receive private funds to attend state colleges and universities. The same issue will go before the Maryland electorate as part of a referendum in November 2011.  And the courts, state as well as federal, continue to enter the fray. In Texas, a district court recently barred the Texas Department of Public Safety from enforcing rules that denied driver’s licenses to immigrants living and working in Texas with valid work authorization.  In Georgia, a federal district court blocked key provisions of that state’s “Show Me Your Papers” law, granting a preliminary injunction in the suit filed by a coalition of civil rights groups and individual attorneys.

In the absence of a federal approach to immigration reform and continued congressional inaction which is expected until after the next presidential election, we can expect more of the same from state and local governments as they attempt to regulate immigration and address the strain our broken immigration system causes to their communities.

Zulkie Partners is nationally recognized for its command of immigration law. We offer services that cover all aspects of corporate immigration law, including nonimmigrant work visas, permanent residence sponsorship and more.

Connect with us today to learn how we can help you further your hiring goals.

Comment » | Department of Homeland Security, E-Verify, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Immigration reform, Worksite enforcement policies

USCIS Launches I-9 Central Online

May 31st, 2011 — 5:21pm

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has launched I-9 Central, a new online resource center dedicated to the most frequently accessed form on USCIS.gov: Form I-9, Employee Eligibility Verification. The website provides employers and employees access to resources, tips, and guidance on completing the I-9 and understanding the I-9 process.

I-9 Central includes sections on employer and employee rights and responsibilities, step-by-step instructions for completing the form, and information on acceptable documents for establishing identity and employment authorization. The site also includes a discussion of common mistakes to avoid when completing the form, guidance on how to correct errors, and answers to employers’ recent questions about the I-9 process.

Comment » | Department of Homeland Security, E-Verify, I-9

SSA Resumes Sending Out No-Match Letters

May 31st, 2011 — 5:18pm

In April 2011, the Social Security Administration (SSA) resumed issuing thousands of so-called “no-match letters” to employers around the country. These letters inform employers that certain Social Security Numbers (SSN) provided by employees do not match the names of the individuals that SSA has on file for such numbers.  A “no-match” may be caused the use of a false or otherwise assigned SSN by an unauthorized worker. However, it may also be the result of an alteration to an individual’s status such as a name change or a simple typographical error.  

This issue is of considerable concern to employers with the recent increase in immigration enforcement aimed at companies employing unauthorized workers.

The new version of the “no-match” letter contains the name of one employee (rather than several employees as in the prior version) and does not include language warning the employer that failure to take action could be construed as constructive knowledge.   It does particularly advise that receipt of the letter in and of itself should not be the basis of adverse action against the employee.  Despite the change in language, it can still be considered by ICE in a potential investigation as indicia that an employer was aware of an individual’s ineligibility for US employment.

Our firm has counseled employers on employer sanctions issues and has represented employers in such enforcement proceedings since these laws were enacted more than 20 years ago.  We recommend that employers pay careful attention to no-match letters.

Zulkie Partners is nationally recognized for its command of immigration law. We offer services that cover all aspects of corporate immigration law, including nonimmigrant work visas, permanent residence sponsorship and more.

Connect with us today to learn how we can help you further your hiring goals.

Comment » | Department of Homeland Security, I-9

Victory for Equal Justice and the Rule of Law: Court of Appeals Enjoins Enforcement of Arizona’s Anti-Immigrant Law (SB 1070)

April 18th, 2011 — 3:35pm

On April 11, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a preliminary injunction against key and controversial provisions of Arizona’s SB 1070, the law enacted nearly a year ago that requires police to demand proof of immigration status from anyone who they have a “reasonable suspicion” of being in the country illegally. The court thus denied Arizona’s appeal of a U.S. district court’s July ruling that prevented segments of the law from going into effect because it was likely that the law violated the U.S. Constitution. Moreover, and significantly, the decision signals that the appeals court believes that the Department of Justice (DOJ) is likely to succeed in its challenge to the law’s constitutionality.

SB 1070 is the draconian state immigration law that was signed into law on April 23, 2010, after Arizona state legislators argued that they needed their own immigration enforcement tools to stem the tide of undocumented immigration into the state. Federal efforts, the state argued, were not enough. The law immediately sparked nationwide boycotts and protests as an unconstitutional attempt to usurp the federal government’s right to enact and control immigration law and as a way to set the stage for abusive and illegal police activity, including profiling. DOJ sued and won an injunction on June 29, 2010, the day before the law was originally set to go into effect.

In its ruling, the Ninth Circuit rightly rejected Arizona’s claim that state police have “inherent authority” to enforce federal immigration laws; in fact, the court held that Arizona’s attempt to drive immigrants from the state interferes with the federal government’s exclusive authority to enforce immigration law. Congress, the court held, intended state officers to “aid in immigration enforcement only under the close supervision of the Attorney General,” which was not the case here. The court also recognized that the SB 1070 has negatively impacted U.S. foreign relations and reflects the dangers of allowing states to enact a patchwork quilt of conflicting laws and regulations. In the immediate aftermath of SB1070’s enactment, a number of states considered or introduced copycat bills, but most states have now backed away from these measures.

While the fate of SB 1070 is likely to be decided by the Supreme Court, for now the court’s decision is a victory not only for the Obama Administration in its ongoing effort to halt the Arizona law, but also for equal justice and the rule of law.

Zulkie Partners is nationally recognized for its command of immigration law. We offer services that cover all aspects of corporate immigration law, including nonimmigrant work visas, permanent residence sponsorship and more.

Connect with us today to learn how we can help you further your hiring goals.

Comment » | Department of Homeland Security, E-Verify, I-9, Immigration Policy Center

USCIS Processing Times: Separating Fact from Fiction

February 28th, 2011 — 3:50pm

USCIS processing times may be accessed on the Zulkie Partners website at http://www.zulkiepartners.com/processing.html.

The posted USCIS processing times represent data that is approximately 45 days old at the time of posting. In addition, the listed dates reflect the most-recently filed case in the particular product line on an examiner’s desk at the time the data as gathered. This means that there are many cases with substantially earlier receipt dates than those officially listed that have not been processed as of the date of publication of the processing times schedule. The National Customer Service Center (NCSC) is not using the processing times listed on the USCIS website when it considers whether a case is beyond the official USCIS processing times. The processing times used by NCSC are substantially longer than those on the posted processing time schedule in many cases, particularly in H and L filings, causing NCSC to refuse to submit a case inquiry in some instances.

Sign-up for Case Updates

USCIS Customers (applicants or petitioners) can create an account to more conveniently access information on pending applications and petitions. 
In addition, USCIS Customers can choose to receive automatic case status updates, which will be sent via e-mail. A new pilot program provides the additional option to receive a text message notification that a case status update has occurred, which will be sent to a United States mobile phone number. USCIS Customers who select the option to receive the text message notification acknowledge that Standard Messaging Rates or other charges related to these notifications may apply.

Click here to access this USCIS service.

Zulkie Partners is nationally recognized for its command of immigration law. We offer services that cover all aspects of corporate immigration law, including nonimmigrant work visas, permanent residence sponsorship and more.

Connect with us today to learn how we can help you further your hiring goals.

Comment » | Department of Homeland Security, I-129, I-140, I-485

Back to top