FIGHTING IMMIGRATION-RELATED JOB DISCRIMINATION: What Workers and
Employers Need to Know
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
132 West 43rd Street 122 Maryland Avenue, NE
New York, NY 10036 Washington, DC 20002
(212) 944-9800 (202) 544-1681
Kenneth B. Clark
Chair, National Advisory Council
Immigrants' Rights Project
The American Civil Liberties Union is a nationwide, nonpartisan
organization of 275,000 members dedicated to preserving and defending the
principles set forth in the Bill of Rights.
Copies of this guide are available for $2.50 each.
Send check/money order to:
ACLU Dept. L
P.O. Box 794
Medford, NY 1176
Copyright 1993 by the American Civil Liberties Union
All Rights Reserved.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Protection from Discrimination
Document Fraud Penalties
Sample Employment Eligibility Verification Form (I-9)
This pamphlet is published by the Immigrants' Rights Project of the
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation. It was originally published in
1987, immediately after the Immigration Reform and Control Act became law.
The pamphlet has been completely revised, updated and expanded through the
unstinting efforts of Gary Chodorow of Boalt Hall School of Law, who
gratefully acknowledges the contributions of the National Immigration Law
Center. All regulations and statutory changes in effect as of January 1,
1993 are incorporated.
The Immigrants' Rights Project is a part of the ACLU National Office in
New York City. It is dedicated to enforcing the constitutional and civil
rights of immigrants through advocacy and education.
Congress passed the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) on November
6, 1986.1 The law attempts to reduce the number of undocumented immigrants
coming to the United States by (1) making it illegal for employers to hire
them and (2) requiring every employer to check each new employee's work
authorization documents and fill out a special government I-9 form. These
requirements are known as the "employer sanctions" provision of IRCA.2
Unfortunately, almost one out of five employers began
discriminating as a result of employer sanctions.3 Many employers try to
"play it safe" by refusing to hire anyone who looks or sounds "foreign."
To protect workers, Congress included in IRCA an "anti-discrimination"
provision, which penalizes employers who discriminate and provides
remedies for workers who have been mistreated.4
This pamphlet describes employer sanctions and explains how to
recognize immigration-related discrimination. More importantly, the
pamphlet specifies fair policies that employers should adopt and provides
details on how advocates can protect workers against employers that act
unfairly. The pamphlet also includes an explanation of the 1990 "document
fraud" law, which imposes heavy penalties on workers who use false
documents to verify their authorization to work.5 Advocates should
carefully explain to workers the risks of false documents.
The pamphlet is designed for all who seek to avoid unlawful
employment practices and particularly for those who advocate for workers'
rights -- workers themselves, union representatives, social workers,
immigrants' rights advocates, and others. The pamphlet gives brief
answers, with charts and examples, that serve as a guide to this
complicated area of the law. It also provides numerous citations to
statutes, regulations and court decisions for lawyers and advocates
seeking to develop greater expertise.
What are employer sanctions?
Employer sanctions prohibits all employers from knowingly hiring or
knowingly continuing to employ anyone not authorized to work in the United
States.6 The law also requires employers to review every employee's work
eligibility and identity documents and to complete and keep on file a
special government form (Employment Eligibility Verification Form I-9).7
The law does not apply to workers hired before November 7, 1986.8
Who is authorized to work?
A citizen, a national, or any other person whose immigration status
entitles him or her to work, or who has been granted an employment
authorization document (EAD) by the INS. "Aliens" (i.e., non-citizens)
authorized to work include legal permanent residents, temporary residents
under the IRCA "amnesty" program, temporary agricultural workers, students
with part-time or full-time work permission, applicants for legalization
or political asylum with work authorization, and many others.9
An immigrant does not have to have a "green card" in order to be
authorized to work.
Who may not be employed?
The law prohibits an employer from:
* Hiring, recruiting, or referring for a fee a person the employer knows
is not authorized to work in the United States.10
* Obtaining the labor of a contractor whom the employer knows to be an
* Continuing to employ a person whom an employer knows is (or has become)
unauthorized to work.12
For which employees must I-9 forms be completed?
In general, an employer must fill out an I-9 form for all new
employees -- U.S. citizens and non-citizens alike. Recruiters and referrers
for a fee of agricultural employees must also complete I-9 forms when a
person they recruit or refer is hired.13
However, an employer need not fill out an I-9 form for:
* Grandfathered employees, meaning employees hired by an employer before
November 7, 1986.14
* Independent contractors, meaning persons who carry on independent
business, contract to do a piece of work, and are subject to control only
as to the results of the work.15
* Casual hires, meaning individuals who provide "sporadic, irregular or
intermittent" domestic service in a private home.16
* Continuing employees, meaning workers who have previously filled out I-9
forms for the employer. Workers qualify as "continuing employees" even if
they have been promoted, demoted or transferred; have returned to work
after a temporary strike or layoff or approved leave; have continued to
work for an employer that has acquired a business from a previous
employer; have been reinstated following wrongful termination; or are
engaged in seasonal employment.17
Also, a self-employed person need not complete an I-9 form on himself or
Do employer sanctions apply to workers who were hired before November 7,
No. IRCA includes a "grandfather clause" that exempts from the sanctions
requirements workers that an employer hired before November 7, 1986.18 An
employer cannot be penalized for employing these workers or for not
filling out I-9 forms, regardless of the workers' immigration status.
Example: An employer cannot be sanctioned for continuing to employ an
undocumented immigrant hired before November 7, 1986.
An employee qualifies as a "grandfathered" worker as long as he or
she is a "continuing employee." A "grandfathered" worker loses that
status by: quitting, being fired, being subject to seasonal employment,
being deported, or leaving the country under an order of voluntary
What is considered valid proof of work authorization?
Employees may document their work authorization by producing either a
single document or a combination of documents.20
Example: A United States passport or "green card" by itself is enough.
Alternatively, a combination of a driver's license and social security
card meets the requirement. An employee can choose which document or
combination of documents to show, and the employer must accept them if
they are valid.
List A: Document showing both identity and work authorization Any one of
the following documents is equally valid and by itself satisfies the
* U.S. passport (unexpired or expired).
* Certificate of U.S. Citizenship (Form N-560 or N-561).
* Certificate of Naturalization (Form N-550 or N-570).
* Unexpired foreign passport with I-551 stamp or with Form I-94 with words
* Alien Registration Receipt Card or Resident Alien Card with photograph
(Form I-151 or I-551).
* Unexpired Temporary Resident Card (Form I-688).
* Unexpired INS Employment Authorization Document (EAD) (Form I-688A or
* Unexpired Re-entry permit (Form I-327).
* Unexpired Refugee Travel Document (Form I-571).
Alternatively, the requirement can be satisfied by a combination of two
documentsÄone from each of the following lists:
List B: Identity document
Any of these documents is valid, even if expired:
* Driver's license or state ID with photo or description.
* Federal, state, or local government ID with photo or description.
* School ID with a photograph.
* Voter registration card.
* U.S. military ID or draft card.
* U.S. Coast Guard Merchant Mariner Card.
* Native American tribal ID.
* Canadian driver's license.
Also acceptable for persons under 18 and the handicapped:
* School record or report card.
* Medical records.
* Day-care or nursery school record.
* Parent, legal guardian, or rehabilitation agency staff certification of
List C: Work authorization document
* Social security card (unless stamped "not valid for employment").
* U.S. birth certificate (including Puerto Rico, Guam, and U.S. territories).
* Certificate of Birth Abroad of U.S. Citizen (Form FS-545 or DS-1350).
* Native American tribal ID.
* U.S. Citizen ID (Form I-197).
* Resident Citizen Card (Form I-179).
* Unexpired INS document with words "Employment Authorized" (e.g., Form
How and when should an employer inquire about an employee's work
By law, information contained on an I-9 form cannot be used for any other
purposes.21 Most importantly, an employer cannot consider improper
factors, such as national origin or citizenship status, in making
employment decisions. To do so is illegal discrimination.22 To insure
that employer sanctions information is not being used for improper
purposes, advocates should encourage employers to adopt the following
* During a job interview, applicants will not be asked if they are
citizens, about their immigration status, or what work papers they have.
* Job applicants will not be requested to produce documentation until
after a conditional job offer has been accepted.
* I-9 forms will be stored apart from personnel records so that
information contained in I-9 forms cannot influence subsequent employment
decisions such as transfers and promotions.
How sure must an employer be that an employee's documents are valid?
The law does not require an employer to be a documents expert. The law
does require that the employer make a good faith decision that a document
reasonably appears on its face to be genuine and that it relates to the
person presenting it.23 Only when an employer knows or has "constructive
knowledge" (i.e., is aware of information that should lead him or her to
know 24) that an employee is not authorized to work, should further
investigation be done.25 Excessive or inappropriate investigation
constitutes illegal discrimination.
* Rumors or hearsay, such as anonymous tips, do not constitute
constructive knowledge and should not trigger an investigation.26
* The INS Handbook for Employers contains sample photographs of several
work authorization documents. However, an employer is not required to
refer to the Handbook.27 Many valid forms of documents are not pictured in
the Handbook. An employer should not fire or refuse to hire a worker
simply because his or her documents do not match the photographs.
* Investigation based solely on the national origin, citizenship status,
or type of work authorization documents submitted by a worker is illegal
discrimination.28 For instance, an employer may not request extra
documents or contact the INS simply because a worker is an immigrant.
* Employers are permitted to make copies of the employee's documents, but
that is not required or necessary.29 However, if an employer decides to
make copies, the employer must do so for all employees to avoid unlawful
Advocates should serve as watchdogs to ensure that employers carry out the
law in a fair manner.
How should Section 1 of the I-9 form (Employee Information and
Verification) be completed?
Section 1 must be completed by a new employee at the time of hire.30 Name,
address, date of birth, and social security number must be provided. If
applicable, work authorization expiration date and/or "A number" must be
recorded. In addition, the employee must attest, under penalty of
perjury, that he or she is authorized to work.
If the employee is unable to complete the form or needs it
translated, the employer should provide assistance. In that case, the
preparer or translator must provide his or her signature and address.31
How should Section 2 (Employer Review and Verification) be completed?
The employer must review a new worker's documents and complete Section 2
of the I-9 form within three days of the hire.32 If the worker's documents
have been lost or stolen, the worker should request replacements
immediately and get receipts proving he or she has asked for replacements.
The receipts may be presented in lieu of the missing documents as long as
the actual documents are presented within 90 days of hire.33
If the employee is hired for a period of employment of less than
three days, Section 2 must be completed at the time of hire and the
employee is not allowed to present receipts instead of documents.34 (A
worker who has only receipts should seek work of at least three days).
How should Section 3 (Updating and Reverification) be completed?
Section 3 should be completed in either of two situations.
* When an employer rehires a former employee within three years of the
date the initial I-9 form was completed,35 or
* When an employee's previous work authorization has expired and must be
In the latter case, the employer must complete Section 3 and review the
employee's current work authorization document not later than the
expiration of the previous work authorization.37 Although work
authorization often expires on the date indicated on the work
authorization document, exceptions apply:
* Permanent residents. The new version of the Resident Alien Card (I-551)
held by legal permanent residents expires ten years from the date of
issuance, yet work authorization for a permanent resident never expires.38
* Asylum applicants. For an asylum applicant whose application is denied
by an Asylum Officer, employment authorization terminates at the
expiration of the employment authorization document or 60 days after the
denial of asylum, whichever is later.
* Nonimmigrants. A nonimmigrant within any of the following classes is
authorized to work for 240 days pending INS processing of an application
for renewal of work authorization: A-3, E-1, E-2, G-5, H-1, H-2A, H-2B,
H-3, I, J-1, L-1, or pursuant to 214(e) of the INA.40
Since INS processing of applications for work authorization renewal is
often slow, immigrants must normally file applications at least 90 days
before the current document expires.41 Even applications filed timely
often are not processed within the the 90 days, through no fault of the
immigrants. Employers should be encouraged to set up a calendar system to
assure that all immigrant employees' work authorization is timely renewed.
It is in the employers' interest to give employees time off work to go to
the INS to process renewals, if necessary. If an employee is eligible for
renewal but the INS fails to act, the employee should find an advocate to
compel the INS to act.
If Section 3 has previously been filled in, the employer should
complete Section 3 on a new I-9 form with the employee's name written on
May an employer require that a worker post a bond to cover the employer's
potential liability under IRCA?
No. IRCA specifically prohibits an employer from requiring an employee to
pay a bond or security against any potential liability under IRCA.43
What penalties may an employer face for violating the employer sanctions
An employer who fails to comply with the employer sanctions provision may
be penalized in various ways:
Civil penalties: * An employer who violates the paperwork verification
requirement -- i.e. does not review the appropriate documents, complete the
I-9 forms, keep them on file,and/or make them available for inspection -- is
subject to a civil fine of $100 to $1,000 per violation.44
* An employer found to have knowingly hired, referred or recruited for a
fee, or continued to employ an unauthorized immigrant (unless hired before
November 7, 1986), is subject to a civil penalty of $250 to $2,000 per
unauthorized immigrant for the first offense; and up to $10,000 for
* Any employer found to have required an employee to post a bond against
potential liability under IRCA is subject to a civil penalty of $1000 and
must return the bond to the employee or, if the employee cannot be
located, to the government.46
Criminal penalties: * An employer found to have engaged in a "pattern or
practice" of knowingly employing unauthorized workers is subject to
criminal penalties of up to $3,000 per unauthorized immigrant and/or up to
six months in jail.47
* False attestation on an I-9 form is a separate criminal offense
punishable by fine, imprisonment for up to five years, or both.48
PROTECTION FROM DISCRIMINATION
What kind of discrimination is prohibited?
In order to foster equal opportunity in employment, IRCA prohibits various
kinds of discrimination. An agency called the Office of Special Counsel
for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices within the U.S.
Department of Justice enforces the law.
* Document discrimination;49
* Citizenship status discrimination;50
* Retaliation against a person involved in an IRCA anti-discrimination case;51 and
* National origin discrimination.52
Specifically, the law prohibits these kinds of discrimination whenever an
* Referring or recruiting for a fee; or
Discrimination in other aspects of work such as promotion, salary
increases, and vacations is not covered by IRCA but may be covered by
other laws.54 Nevertheless, if an employer discriminates by making other
aspects of work so bad that a worker has no choice but to quit, then the
worker is protected by IRCA.55 This is called "constructive discharge."
Example: Linda was constantly subjected to harassment by co-workers
because she is not a U.S. citizen. After her supervisor ignored her
repeated requests for help, she quit. Under the law, she was
What size and type of employers are covered by the IRCA
IRCA's anti-discrimination provision covers any employer with more than
three employees on the date of discrimination.56 Part-time and full-time
employees are both counted.57 Employers covered by IRCA include public and
private employers, employment agencies, unions, contractors, even persons
who employ domestic help, if they have more than three employees.
What is document discrimination?
Document discrimination occurs if, in fulfilling the I-9 requirement, an
employer requests from a worker more or different documents than are
required by IRCA or refuses to honor documents that on their face
reasonably appear to be genuine.58 Document discrimination is the most
common type of immigration-related employment discrimination.
Example: In order to prove identity and work authorization, a new employee
who is authorized to work shows her employer a driver's license with a
photo and a Social Security card. The employer, who misunderstands the
law, requests a "green card" instead. This is illegal discrimination
because the employer may not request different documents as long as the
employee has presented documents that are sufficient under the law.59
Example: An employee just renewed his expired work authorization. To
reverify his eligibility to work, he presents a social security card to
his employer. Nevertheless, the employer asks to see an INS-issued work
authorization document. This is illegal document discrimination.
Document discrimination is prohibited both when an employer initially
checks a new employee's documents and later, if reverification is
Is it illegal to discriminate because a worker's employment authorization
may expire in the future?
Yes. A future work authorization expiration date should not be considered
by an employer in determining whether an immigrant is qualified for a
particular position.61 The Office of Special Counsel considers this
document discrimination. Any immigrant worker may be able to get renewed
work authorization from the INS, avoiding a gap in eligibility to work.
Example: To fulfill the I-9 requirement, a worker presents a work
authorization document with an expiration date. The employer refuses to
hire the worker because the job requires training and the employer is
afraid to invest in a worker who may in the future lose eligibility for
employment. This is illegal discrimination.62
What is citizenship status discrimination?
Citizenship status discrimination is any different or less favorable
treatment based on a person's citizenship or immigration status.63
Example: Sara, a refugee, applies for a job but the employer refuses to
hire her because of company policy to only hire U.S. citizens. This is
citizenship status discrimination because an employer may not adopt a
policy of preferring or hiring only citizens, permanent residents, etc.64
Example: When fulfilling I-9 requirements, an employer is not allowed to
photocopy documents of only persons of certain citizenship statuses (e.g.,
non-citizens only). Although an employer may (but is not required to)
photocopy documents, treating different citizenship statuses differently
Are there any exceptions to IRCA's prohibition against citizenship status
There are two limited exceptions to IRCA's requirement that citizens and
immigrants be treated equally:
* Where existing federal, state or local laws, regulations or contracts
with governmental entities require employers to hire only U.S. citizens.66
For instance, a state law requiring police officers to be citizens would
not violate IRCA.
* Where an employer selects an equally-qualified U.S. citizen instead of a
non-citizen.67 This exception is narrow. The employer must decide on a
case-by-case basis at the time of hire, recruitment, or referral that the
two applicants are equally qualified based on the actual requirements of
the job.68 Discrimination in a discharge situation is not permitted under
Although IRCA does not prohibit these two types of citizenship
discrimination, such actions may violate other civil rights laws:
Example: The City of Middletown has a law that all city employees must be
U.S. citizens. This is not citizenship status discrimination under IRCA
because it is required by local law. Nevertheless, this across-the-board
citizenship requirement clearly violates the Fourteenth Amendment of the
What is national origin discrimination?
National origin discrimination includes any different or less favorable
treatment of an individual because of his or her ancestry or country of
birth. It is also national origin discrimination to treat a person
differently because he or she has the physical, cultural or linguistic
characteristics of a particular national origin group.71
Example: Moonbeam Bakery refuses to hire any employee who was born in
India or whose ancestors were from India. This is national origin
Example: New Age Computers does not hire receptionists who are "foreign
looking," "foreign sounding,"73 or have a foreign name.74 This is national
Example: Accountants Inc. stops recruiting entry-level employees from the
local high school because a large percentage of the students are Asian.
Accountants Inc. also adopts a new policy requiring all entry-level
employees to speak English fluently, although many of the company's
present employees perform their jobs well without being fluent. Both of
these practices constitute national origin discrimination.75
Example: Dawn, an undocumented immigrant, began working at Elegant
Antiques last year . She invented a false social security number to give
her boss. Last month Dawn became a legal permanent resident, so she asked
her boss to record her real social security number. Dawn was fired
because she had used a false number. The firing is illegal discrimination
since Elegant Antiques had never fired other employees for changing their
Finally, it is national origin discrimination to treat a person
differently because he or she is associated by marriage or in other ways
with a particular national origin group.77
Example: Al's Russian Deli fires Joe because he has been socializing with
Lithuanians. This is national origin discrimination.
When is national origin discrimination prohibited by IRCA?
Since before IRCA, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 has
prohibited national origin discrimination by large companies. IRCA added
to Title VII by covering small employers. Specifically, Title VII applies
to employers who have 15 or more workers for 20 or more weeks during the
calendar year in which the discrimination occurred or in the previous
calendar year.78 IRCA's national origin discrimination provision applies
to companies that have more than three employees but are not big enough to
be covered by Title VII.79
Example: Fancy Fabrics employed 12 people in 1992 when it discriminatorily
fired Karen. However, the company employed 30 people for all of 1991.
The company is covered by Title VII because it hired more than 15 workers
in the calendar year before the discriminatory act.
Example: Agribusiness, Inc. is a farm that employs 50 workers during the
harvest season, which lasts for only 5 weeks. During the off-season, when
it employed eight workers, Agribusiness fired Tomas. Agribusiness is not
covered by Title VII because it does not employ 15 workers for 20 weeks.
Yet Agribusiness is covered by IRCA because it employed more than three
employees on the date it fired Tomas.
IRCA charges are filed with the Office of Special Counsel, but
Title VII charges are filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC). However, an IRCA charge filed in a timely fashion that
should be a Title VII charge, or vice-versa, will be sent to and processed
by the correct government office.80
National Origin Discrimination: Title VII vs. IRCA.
Enforcement Agency: EEOC.
Size of business: At least 15 workers for 20 or more weeks in the current
or previous year
Employer Actions Covered: Hiring, firing, recruitment or referral for a
fee, compensation, fringe benefits, promotion, training, work assignments,
and other terms, conditions, or privileges of employment.108
Protected Employees: All persons, including undocumented immigrants.109
Disparate Impact Discrimination: Covered.110
Enforcement agency: Office of Special Counsel
Size of Business: More than 3 workers but not covered by Title VII.
Employer Actions Covered: Hiring, firing, recruitment or referral for a fee.
Protected Employees: Only "authorized" workers.
Disparate Impact Discrimination: Not covered.
What is retaliation?
Intimidation, threats, coercion, or retaliation against any person who
intends to or has filed an IRCA charge or a complaint, testified, assisted
or participated in any manner in any anti-discrimination investigation,
procedure, or hearing is illegal.81
More often than not, an employer that wants to retaliate against a
worker who has filed a discrimination charge will cite substandard
on-the-job performance. The worker will need to show that his of her
performance was at least satisfactory -- and that the real reason for the
adverse treatment is retaliation.
Which employees are protected by IRCA?
Any person may bring an IRCA document discrimination or national origin
discrimination charge, unless the individual is not authorized to work in
To file a citizenship status discrimination charge under IRCA, a
person must be a "protected individual."83 A protected individual is a
U.S. citizen or national, or any immigrant who is a:
* Lawful temporary resident under the general amnesty or farm worker (SAW)
* Political asylee;
* Refugee; or
* Permanent resident.85
For a permanent resident to qualify as a protected individual, he or she
* Apply for naturalization within six months of becoming eligible; and
* Become naturalized within two years of applying (or show that
naturalization is being pursued actively).86
Most permanent residents are eligible to apply for U.S. citizenship five
years after they receive permanent resident status.87 A person who has
gained permanent residence by marrying a U.S. citizen is eligible for
naturalization after being a permanent resident for three years.88 The
date a person became a permanent resident is indicated on his or her
Arguably, any person can file an IRCA retaliation charge, whether
or not the person is authorized to work.89
Must the employer be biased to be guilty of discrimination?
No. Regulations provide that IRCA only covers "intentional
discrimination" not "disparate impact discrimination."90 "Intentional
discrimination" means that the employer intended the results (such as the
firing or not hiring) of his or her action. But discrimination can be
intentional whether or not the employer is prejudiced or has a bad motive.
Example: Yvonne, the owner of Executive Laundry, wants to obey the
employer sanctions provision. She mistakenly believes that workers must
be citizens or permanent residents to be authorized to work. She asks all
job applicants to show U.S. birth certificates or green cards. When some
workers fail to produce those documents, she feels sorry but refuses to
hire them. This is intentional discrimination, even though Yvonne is not
"Disparate impact" discrimination, on the other hand, occurs when a
neutral practice or policy of an employer has the effect of
discriminating. Disparate impact discrimination is not covered by IRCA
but may be covered by other laws.
Example: Kentucky Canning Factory policy only hires applicants with high
school diplomas. Yet diplomas are unnecessary to perform the work since
any worker with 6 months prior canning experience is qualified. The
Factory is in a community of Indian immigrants, but none have been hired
because they do not have U.S. high school diplomas. If the factory's
hiring policy has the purpose of discriminating against immigrants from
India, it is intentional discrimination. On the other hand, if it only
has the effect of discriminating against Indians, it is disparate impact
What remedies are available to a discrimination victim under IRCA?
Upon finding that an employer has violated IRCA's anti-discrimination
provision, a judge must order that the discrimination stop. In addition,
the judge may order:91
Assistance for the victim:
* Hire or rehire of the employee.
* Backpay and/or front pay for any loss of earnings resulting from the
* Removal of false performance reviews or warnings from an employee's
* Removal of any restrictions on an employee's assignments, work shifts,
Civil penalties payable to the U.S. government:
* For the first offense, up to $2000 per individual discriminated against;
for subsequent offenses, up to $10,000 per individual.
* $100 to $1000 per individual victim of document discrimination.
Measures to avoid future discrimination:
* Maintenance of a record of all job applicants for a period of up to
* Posting of workplace notices concerning employee rights and employer
* Education for all hiring personnel concerning compliance with IRCA.
Finally, the judge may order that the attorneys' fees of the winning party
be paid by the losing party if the losing party's arguments were
What should an individual do if he or she has been discriminated against?
Both formal and informal means of resolving the problem may exist. In
either case, a discrimination victim should do the following:
* Sometimes it is unclear whether the employer has discriminated. (For
instance, an employer who discriminates against job applicants who look
foreign or sound foreign may simply tell certain applicants that the job
is filled.) In this case, it may be possible to do a test to get evidence
that an employer is discriminating.
Example: Rodrigo went to apply for a job, but the employer said that the
job was filled. Rodrigo suspects that he was turned down because he is
Latino and has a Spanish accent. Rodrigo asks his friend Jimmy to call
about the job. Jimmy is Anglo and does not have an accent. The employer
offers Jimmy the job. This is indirect evidence that the employer is
discriminating against Rodrigo based on his national origin.
* Organize evidence of illegal discrimination. Keep a log of the time,
date, location, people involved and nature of actions that demonstrate any
pattern of illegal discrimination. Keep a file of any relevant documents
from the employer.
* Make a list of potential witnesses, including anyone else who was
present when the worker was discriminated against.
* Keep a job search log. The person discriminated against will need to
look for another job and should keep a list of all the places where he or
she looks. The log should list the name of the company and the person
contacted there, the location of the company, the date of application, and
a description of the job applied for. If discrimination is later proven,
this log will help the victim qualify for back pay.
What informal ways exist to resolve the problem?
It may not be necessary to hire a lawyer or to file a formal charge in
order to resolve the problem. For instance, if an employer refuses to
accept proper documents from a job applicant, it may be enough for the
applicant (or an advocate on his or her behalf) to provide a list of
acceptable documents to the employer. A significant cause of
discrimination is employers' lack of education about the law.
Filing formal charges with the appropriate agency should be
pursued if informal means fail.
How can formal IRCA charges be filed?
A discrimination victim does not need an attorney to file an IRCA charge,
but consulting an attorney or a non-profit agency may be helpful. Charges
should be filed with the Office of Special Counsel. Use of the
government's charge form (OSC-1), in Spanish or English, is preferable but
not required. For free information and assistance, write:
Office of Special Counsel for
Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices
P.O. Box 27728
Washington, DC 20038-7728
1-800-255-7688 (toll free).
(Fax) (202) 616-5509
The TDD number for the hearing impaired is
May charges be filed by persons other than the actual victim?
Under IRCA, the injured party or another party authorized by him or her
can file charges. That includes friends, relatives, union
representatives, church workers, attorneys -- anyone. The INS can also file
In addition, the Office of Special Counsel may choose to open an
independent investigation and file charges on its own initiative.94 This
is important because if a victim of discrimination cannot meet the
technical requirements (e.g., the person does not qualify as a "protected
individual"), the Special Counsel may still choose to investigate an
employer. In such a case, the Special Counsel may reach a settlement
agreement in which the person receives relief.
Are there time limits for filing charges?
A discrimination victim must file an IRCA charge within 180 days of the
date on which the discrimination occurred. If the charge is mailed to the
Office of Special Counsel, it must be postmarked within 180 days of the
discriminatory act.95 Failure to comply with the filing deadline will
result in a charge being rejected.96 However, in some cases late charges
may be accepted for good reason -- if, for instance, the employer keeps alive
the worker's hopes that the discriminatory decision is not final.97
If the deadline has passed, a discrimination victim should not
give up on filing a claim. The Special Counsel should be called and
informed. Even if late filing is not accepted, the Special Counsel may
pursue an independent investigation and the victim could be included in a
What is the procedure for deciding a case?
Upon receiving a charge of discrimination, the Office of Special Counsel
has 120 days to decide whether there is "reasonable cause to believe that
the charge is true." The Special Counsel will conduct an investigation
that could include interviews with the charging party, the employer and
other witnesses, as well as a review of I-9 forms and other relevant
documents.98 If the Special Counsel believes discrimination has occurred,
it will send a "demand letter" to the employer requesting that the victim
receive the proper remedies. If the employer refuses, the employer will
probably request settlement talks to try to solve the problem without
going before a judge. If settlement cannot be reached, the Special
Counsel may decide to bring a complaint before an administrative law judge
If the Special Counsel does not bring a complaint before the ALJ
within the 120-day period, the Special Counsel will notify the charging
party of the right to file a complaint on its own directly before the
ALJ.99 If the charging party wishes to pursue its claim, it must file
within 90 days after receiving notice that the Special Counsel will not
file.100 However, the Special Counsel retains the right to investigate the
charges or bring a complaint before the ALJ during this 90-day period.101
Whether the complaint is brought by the Special Counsel or by the
charging party, a hearing will be held before an ALJ who will determine
whether discrimination occurred and the type of penalty that should be
imposed. There is no rule that the charging party must be represented by
an attorney at the hearing, but the hearing is very much like a trial, so
an attorney's trial expertise is helpful. After the ALJ's ruling in the
case, either party may appeal to the federal court of appeals by filing a
notice of appeal within 60 days.102
Time Line for IRCA Anti-Discrimination Case:
Day 1: Discriminatory act occurs.
180 days after discriminatory act: Deadline for filing charge with Office
of Special Counsel.
During the 120-day period following filing of charge: Special Counsel
investigates charge and may attempt settlement.
End of 120-day period: Deadline for Office of Special Counsel to either
file complaint with ALJ or notify charging party of right to file own
complaint within 90 days.
Indefinite period: ALJ considers and decides case.
60 days after ALJ decision: Deadline for appeal to federal court.
End of 120-day period: Deadline for Office of Special Counsel to either
file complaint with ALJ or notify charging party of right to file own
complaint within 90 days.
Do other laws prohibit immigration-related employment discrimination?
Yes. In addition to IRCA, there are various laws that outlaw employment
* Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII prohibits
employment discrimination on the grounds of race, color, religion, sex or
* Other federal laws. Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866,104
the National Labor Relations Act,105 OSHA,106 and the Fair Labor Standards
Act, 107 require employers not to discriminate on the basis of race, to
comply with certain health, safety, and minimum wage requirements, and to
allow employees to unionize. The Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution prohibits most kinds of employment discrimination on the
basis of race and national origin at any level of state or local
* State and local laws. In many areas, statutes and ordinances prohibit
discrimination on the basis of national origin, alienage, or citizenship
* Collective bargaining agreements. Agreements between a union and an
employer can also protect employees against discrimination.
As a rule, all available legal remedies should be pursued. A victim of
discrimination should file charges under all applicable federal, state,
and local laws.
Example: Widget Inc. refuses to hire Ester because she is an immigrant
with dark skin and a "foreign" accent. Ester may be able to file a
citizenship status discrimination charge under IRCA, a national origin
discrimination charge under Title VII, a racial discrimination charge
under Section 1981 and a charge under state or local law.
DOCUMENT FRAUD PENALTIES
What is the 1990 document fraud law?
Since November 29, 1990, a new document fraud law has prohibited the
knowing use or acceptance of documents that are fake, altered, or issued
to a person other than the possessor to satisfy any requirement of the
Immigration and Nationality Act. The INS investigates and prosecutes
cases of document fraud. A person determined to have violated the law
must pay monetary penalties. An immigrant violator may, in addition, be
subject to permanent deportation or exclusion.111
Advocates should carefully explain to workers, especially
immigrants, the dangers of document fraud.
What is illegal under the document fraud law?
Penalties may be imposed against a worker who knowingly does any of the
* Makes a false document or alters a real document for the purpose of
satisfying the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) (which includes the
employer sanctions provision).
Example: It is illegal to place one's own name on someone else's social
security card to get a job.
* Uses, attempts to use, possesses, obtains, accepts, or receives any
false or altered document in order to satisfy any requirement of the INA.
Example: It is illegal for a job applicant to try to show an employer a
false driver's license to try to get a job.
* Uses or attempts to use any document lawfully issued to someone else,
for the purpose of satisfying a requirement of the INA.
Example: It is illegal to use a "green card" issued to another person.
* Accepts or receives any document lawfully issued to a person other than
the possessor, for the purpose of complying with paperwork verification
Example: It is illegal for an employee to accept a Social Security card
that he or she knows was issued to another person.
The statute is violated only if the accused worker has acted
knowingly and with the purpose of falsely meeting with the INA or the I-9
Although this pamphlet concentrates on the relationship between
document fraud and employer sanctions, the document fraud law may apply in
many different circumstances. For instance, the law could be violated if
an applicant fills out a visa application with false information.114
How does the INS investigate document fraud?
The INS is in charge of enforcing the document fraud law. There are many
ways the INS might learn about a violation. Among them, the INS could
* Learn about the fraudulent documents during a verification check of an
employer's I-9 forms.
* Discover the existence of fraudulent documents from information in an
application for an immigration benefit.
* Receive a tip from another person.
* Interrogate or arrest a person carrying fraudulent documents.
What are the penalties for violating the document fraud law?
The penalty is most harsh for an immigrant. An immigrant becomes
deportable and excludable forever. No waiver is available.
Any violator -- immigrant or citizen -- may be assessed a civil
fine payable to the INS of $250 to $2000 for each illegal document used,
accepted, or created. Penalties for subsequent offenses are $2000 to
$5000 for each illegal document.115
In addition, wholly apart from penalties under the document fraud
law, any violator could be subject to criminal prosecution.116
How can an immigrant fight document fraud charges?
Get an attorney immediately:
If the INS believes that a document fraud violation has occurred, it will
issue a Notice of Intent to Fine (I-763) instructing the accused person of
the charges, the penalty to be imposed, and the right to request a hearing
to contest the charges.117 An immigrant accused of document fraud should
see an immigration attorney immediately after receiving a Notice of Intent
to Fine. The accused person has a right to be represented by an attorney.
Do not waive the right to a hearing:
The INS may ask the respondent to sign a document admitting to the
violation or waiving the right to a hearing.118 The respondent should not
sign. If he or she signs, the INS's order of document fraud becomes
finalÄno appeal is possible.119
Moreover, a respondent should not admit to the INS any facts
regarding the allegation of document fraud or offer any statements
regarding place of birth without first speaking with an attorney.
Request a hearing before the ALJ:
The accused person is called the "respondent."120 The respondent has no
automatic right to a hearing to defend himself or herself. Instead, the
respondent must request, in writing, a hearing before an ALJ.121 The
written request must be filed with the INS within 60 days after service of
the Notice of Intent to Fine.122
It is very important that a timely request for a hearing be made.
If a person does not request a hearing in time, the INS automatically
issues a final "order" of document fraudÄno appeal is possible.123
Attend the hearing before the ALJ:
If the respondent requests a hearing, an ALJ will preside. The government
must prove that the respondent has violated the law. If the respondent
prevails at the hearing, no penalties can be imposed.
An ALJ's order may be vacated or modified by the Attorney General
within 30 days after it is made.124 Appeal to a federal court of appeals
is available but must be made within 45 days of the order (or from the
Attorney General's decision if she acts).125
How can an immigrant who has received a final order of document fraud
contest deportation and exclusion?
Immigration proceedings before an immigration judge are different than and
in addition to a document fraud hearing before an ALJ. To avoid
deportation or exclusion, an immigrant must first contest the document
fraud charge. If an immigrant loses, he or she must then attend and
contest the immigration proceedings.
To begin immigration proceedings, the INS will serve the
respondent an Order to Show Cause, which is a paper notifying him or her
of the charge of being deportable or excludable because of receiving a
final order of document fraud. The Order to Show Cause also notifies the
respondent of the right to a hearing before an immigration judge.126
Send a change of address form to the immigration judge:
The respondent should check the Order to Show Cause to be sure it lists
his or her correct address and telephone number. A hearing notice,
stating the date, time and place of the immigration hearing will be sent
to that address. If the Order to Show Cause address is incorrect, the
respondent must send a change of address form to the immigration judge
within 5 days after receiving the Order to Show Cause. The official
change of address form (EOIR-33) must be used. Any future change of
address must also be reported within five days on form EOIR-33.127
If the respondent has received an Order to Show Cause in the mail
but does not notify the immigration judge of a change of address, the
immigration judge cannot notify the respondent of the hearing. If the
respondent does not know when the hearing is and does not go, he or she
can be ordered deported or excluded without a hearing.128
Do not sign for voluntary departure before consulting an immigration
The INS may also ask the respondent to sign a "voluntary departure"
document that is an agreement to leave the country immediately without a
hearing. Do not sign any document giving up the right to a hearing before
consulting an immigration attorney.
Attend and contest the immigration proceeding:
If the respondent fails to attend the hearing before the immigration
judge, he or she can be ordered deported or excluded automatically. The
respondent will not have any chance to request permission to remain in the
U.S. The consequences of being deported or excluded can be devastating.
Only by attending the hearing before the immigration judge does the
respondent have a chance to stay in or enter this country legally.129
At the immigration hearing, the the INS must prove that the
respondent is (a) not a citizen and (b) has received a final order of
document fraud. It may be possible for the respondent to challenge the
validity and appropriateness of the order of document fraud. (For
instance, the order may be invalid if the respondent never received the
Notice of Intent to Fine from the INS or was coerced into waiving his or
her right to request a hearing before an ALJ). Finally, the respondent
may be able to seek relief from the immigration judge. For instance, he
or she may be eligible for suspension of deportation, adjustment of
status, voluntary departure, political asylum, certain waivers, etc.
A full discussion of strategies for contesting the immigration
proceeding is beyond the scope of this pamphlet. An immigrant who
receives a Notice of Intent to Fine for document fraud should see an
immigration attorney immediately.
APPENDIX: [print edition of this publication includes a facsimile of the
EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION FORM (I-9)
EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION FORM (I-9)
1. Pub.L.No. 99-603, 100 Stat. 3372 (1986).
2. See generally Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Sec. 274a (1992),
8 U.S.C. Sec. 1324a (1992).
3. General Accounting Office, "Immigration Reform: Employer Sanctions
and the Question of Discrimination" (GAO/GGD-90-62, March 1990).
4. See generally INA Sec. 274B, 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1324b (1992). See also 28
C.F.R. Secs. 44.100 et seq.
5. See generally INA Sec. 274C, 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1324c (1992).
6. INA Sec. 274A (a)(1992).
7. INA Sec. 274A (b)(1992).
8. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.7 (1992).
9. INA Sec. 274A(h)(3)(1992); 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.12 (1992).
10. INA Sec. 274A(a)(1)(A)(1992).
11. INA Sec. 274A(a)(4)(1992); 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.5 (1992).
12. INA Sec. 274A(a)(2)(1992).
13. INA Sec. 274A(a)(1)(B)(ii)(1992).
14. IRCA Sec. 101(a)(3); 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.7 (1992).
15. 8 C.F.R. Secs. 274a.1(f) & (j)(1992).
16. 8 C.F.R. Secs. 274a.1(f) & (h)(1992).
17. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.2(b)(1)(viii)(1992).
18. IRCA Sec. 101(a)(3); 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.7 (1992).
19. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.7(b)(1992); see Maka v. INS, 904 F.2d 1351 (9th
Cir. 1990) (employer fined for re-employing unauthorized immigrant who
lost grandfathered status after quitting voluntarily).
20. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.2 (1992).
21. INA Sec. 274A(b)(5)(1992).
22. INA Sec. 274B (1992).
23. INA Sec. 274A(b)(1)(A)(1992).
24. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.1(l)(1992); see Mester Mfg. Co. v. INS, 879 F.2d
561 (9th Cir. 1989)(employer had constructive knowledge that immigrant
employees unauthorized when, after being put on notice by INS that they
were suspected of using fraudulent documents, employer failed to make
sufficient further inquiry); New El Rey Sausage Co. v. INS, 925 F.2d 1153
(9th Cir 1991)(same); Collins Foods Int'l v. INS, 948 F.2d 549
(1991)(forged social security card would not have alerted reasonable
person to its falsity, so although employer failed to compare card to
sample in INS Handbook for Employers, employer not liable).
25. See supra n.24.
26. See 8 C.F.R. 274a.1(l)(1992).
27. Collins Foods Int'l v. INS, 948 F.2d 549 (1991).
28. INA Sec. 274B (1992).
29. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.2(b)(3).
30. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.2(b)(1)(A) (1992).
32. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.2(b)(1)(ii) (1992).
33. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.2(b)(1)(vi) (1992).
34. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.2(b)(1)(iii) (1992).
35. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.2(c) (1992).
36. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.2(b)(1)(vii) (1992).
38. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.12(a)(1) (1992) ("An expiration date on the Form
1-551 reflects only that the card must be renewed, not that the
individual's work authorization has expired").
39. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 208.7(b)(1) (1992).
40. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.12(b)(15) (1992).
41. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.13 (1992).
42. Handbook for Employers at 4.
43. INA 274A(g)(1) (1992).
44. INA Sec. 274A(e)(5) (1992).
45. INA Sec. 274A(e)(4) (1992).
46. INA Sec. 274A(g)(2) (1992).
47. INA Sec. 274A(f) (1992).
48. 18 U.S.C. Secs. 1001 & 1546(b) (1992).
49. INA Sec. 274B(a)(6) (1992) See generally 28 C.F.R. Secs. 44.200 et
seq. for regulations implementing anti-discrimination protections.
50. INA Sec. 274B(a)(1)(B) (1992).
51. INA Sec. 274B(a)(5) (1992) (IRCA).
52. INA Sec. 274B(a)(1)(A) (1992) (IRCA).
53. INA Sec. 274B(a)(1).
54. See Fayyaz v. The Sheraton Corp., OCAHO Case NO. 89-200430 (Apr. 10,
55. See Banuelos v. Transportation Leasing Company, OCAHO Case No.
89-200314 (Oct. 24, 1990).
56. INA Sec. 274B(a)(2)(A) (1992).
57. Preamble to 52 Fed. Reg. 37,402 (Oct. 6, 1987).
58. INA Sec. 274B(a)(6) (1992).
59. Id; see U.S. v. Lasa Marketing Firms, OCAHO Case No. 88-200061 (Nov.
27, 1989) amended (Mar 14, 1990) at 28 (refusal to refer temporary
resident for employment without "green card"); Jones v. DeWitt Nursing
Home, OCAHO Case No. 88-200202 at 14 (June 20, 1990) (termination for
failure to submit a birth certificate, although employee had submitted
social security card and state-issued identity card); U.S. v. Marcel Watch
Corp., OCAHO Case No. 89-200085 at 15 (Mar 22, 1990) amended (May 10,
1990) (insistence on "green card" for U.S. citizen born in Puerto Rico).
60. U.S. v. Louis Padnos Iron & Metal Co., OCAHO Case No. 91-200152 (Mar.
61. Handbook for Employers at 4.
62. See Jorge A. Del Risco v. Potomac Electric Power Co., OCAHO Case No.
89-200038 (complaint dismissed after settlement Aug. 8, 1989).
63. INA Sec. 274B(a)(1)(B) (1992).
64. See U.S. v. Mesa Airlines, OCAHO Case No. 88-200001 (July 24, 1989),
appeal dismissed 951 F.2d 1186 (10th Cir. 1991).
65. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.2(b)(3) (1992).
66. INA Sec. 274B(a)(2)(C) (1992). See Sosa v. U.S. Postal Service, OCAHO
Case No. 89-200001 (Dec. 15, 1989) (postal service regulation falls within
exception); Elhajomar v. City of Honolulu, OCAHO Case No. 89-2000269 (Oct.
4, 1990) (state statute falls within exception).
67. INA Sec. 274B(a)(4) (1992).
68. 28 C.F.R. 44.200(b)(2) (1992); U.S. v. Mesa Airlines, OCAHO Case Nos.
88-200001 & 2 at 83 (July 24, 1989), appeal dismissed, 951 F.2d 1186 (10th
70. See Bernal v. Fainter, 104 S.Ct. 2312 (1984).
71. 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1606.1 (1992).
72. See In re Charge of Luis Aguilera, U.S. v. Castle Valley Auto Sales,
Inc., OCAHO Case No. 90-200143 (Mar. 5, 1992).
73. Preamble to 52 Fed. Reg. 37,402 (Oct. 6, 1987).
74. 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1601.1 (1992).
75. 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1606.7 (1982) (Title VII); Preamble to 52 Fed. Reg. 37,
402 (Oct. 6, 1987).
76. See League of United Latin American Citizens v. Pasadena Ind. School
Dist., 662 F. Supp. 443 (S.D. Tex 1987).
77. 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1606.1 (1992) (Title VII); see, e.g., In re Charge of
Luis Aguilera, United States v. Castle Valley Auto Sales, Inc. OCAHO Case
No. 90-200143 (Mar. 5, 1992).
78. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000e(b) (1992).
79. INA Sec. 274B(a)(2)(B) (1992).
80. 54 Fed. Reg 32,499 (Aug 8, 1989).
81. INA Sec. 274B(a)(5) (1992) (IRCA); 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000e-3(a) (Title
82. INA Secs. 274B(a)(1), 274A(h)(3) (1992); 8 C.F.R. Sec. 274a.12 (1992).
It is unclear whether unauthorized workers falling within the
"grandfather" clause are covered, although the Office of Special Counsel
believes they are not. Preamble to 52 Fed. Reg. 37,403 (Oct. 6, 1987).
83. INA Sec. 274B(a)(1)(B) (1992).
84. There is a special rule allowing persons granted temporary residency
under the legalization program to backdate their protection to the date
they filed for amnesty. 28 C.F.R. Sec. 44.101(c)(2) (1992).
85. INA Sec. 274B(a)(3) (1992).
86. Id. Also, the previous requirement in the law that a person file a
"Declaration of Intention to Become a Citizen" to be considered a
protected individual has been eliminated. IMMACT 90 Sec. 533(a).
87. INA Sec. 316(a)(1992).
88. INA Sec. 319(a)(1992).
89. Compare INA Sec. 274B(a)(5)(1992) with Sec. 274B(a)(1)(1992).
90. 28 C.F.R. Sec. 44.200(a)(1992). The regulation may misinterpret the
statute, which arguably covers both intentional and unintentional
discrimination by an employer. See Gonzalez, Standards of Proof in
Section 274B of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, 41 Vand.
L. Rev. 1323 (1988).
91. INA Sec. 274B(g)(2)(1992)
92. INA Sec. 274B(h) & (j)(4)(1992)(IRCA).
93. INA Sec. 274B(b)(1)(1992).
94. INA Sec. 274B(d)(1)(1992).
95. INA Sec. 274B(b)(3)(1992).
97. U.S. v. Mesa Airlines, OCAHO Case Nos. 88-200002 at 52-53 (July
24,1989), appeal dismissed, 951 F. 2d 1186 (10th Cir. 1991).
98. INA Sec. 274B(d)(1) (1992); 28 C.F.R. Sec. 44.302(a) & (b) (1992).
99. INA Sec. 274B(d)(2)(1992).
102. INA Sec. 274B(i)(1)(1992).
103. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000e-2 (1992).
104. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1981 (1992).
105. 29 U.S.C. Sec. 151 et seq. (1992).
106. 29 U.S.C. Sec. 651 et seq. (1992).
107. 29 U.S.C. Sec. 201 et seq. (1992).
108. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000e-2(a)(1992).
109. EEOC v Tortilleria "La Mejor", 758 F. Supp. 585 (E.D. Cal. 1991); see
EEOC v Hacienda Hotel, 881 F. 2d 1504, 1517 (9th Cir. 1989).
110. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000e-2 (1992).
111. See generally INA Sec. 274C (1992); 8 C.F.R. Sec. 270 et seq. The
exact nature of the law is still uncertain because the government has not
yet begun to enforce it.
112. INA Sec. 274C(a)(1992).
114. 8 C.F. R. Sec. 270.1 (1992).
115. INA Sec. 274C(d)(3)(1992).
116. See 8 C.F. R. Sec. 270.3(a)(1992) (nothing in Section 274C diminishes
penalties available under Title 18.). Title 18 prohibits false statements
to an agency of the U.S. (Sec. 1001); fraud and misuse of documents and
false attestation (Sec. 1546); aiding and abetting, and conspiracy (Secs.
2 & 371).
117. 8 C.F. R. Sec. 270.2)(e)(1992).
118. 8 C.F. R. Sec. 270.2(f)(1992).
119. INA Sec. 274C(d)(2)(B)(1992); 8 C. F. R. Sec. 270.2(f) & (g) (1992).
120. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 270.2(d)(1992).
121. INA Sec. 274C(d)(2)(A) & (B)(1992).
122. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 270.2(e)(2)(iii) & (f)(1992).
123. INA Sec. 274C (d)(2)(B) (1992); 8 C.F.R. Secs. 270.2(f) & (g)(1992).
124. INA Sec. 274C(d)(4)(1992).
125. INA Sec. 274C(d)(5)(1992).
126. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 3.15 (1992).
128. 8 C.F.R. Sec. 3.26 (1992).
THE ACLU IMMIGRANTS' RIGHTS PROJECT
The ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project engages in litigation, public
education, advocacy and professional training to protect immigrants
against discrimination and expolitation, and to enforce the fundamental
constitutional safeguards of due process and equal protection. The
Project works to: protect the rights of political refugees; combat
employment discrimination against aliens and American citizens who look
or sound "foreign"; enforce due process standards in deportation
proceedings; challenge the power of Congress to enact laws that abridge
aliens' rights; ensure the right to be represented by counsel, and
implement the right to obtain employment authorization.
The Project publishes studies, reports and educational materials for
lawyers, advocates and immigrants. Project staff have testified before
Congress and other bodies on such issues as the rights of Haitian
refugees; the discriminatory effect of employer sanctions; the
counterproductive and intrusive effects of proposed national employment
identity cards; the hardship caused by legislative penalties against
marriages between U.S. citizens and aliens; the conditions at alien
detention centers, and the health-threatening impact of mandatory HIV
testing of immigrants. The Project also regularly trains immigration
attorneys, the private bar and members of the immigrant advocacy
community on civil rights and immigration law issues.
ACLU Free Reading Room | A publications and information resource of the
gopher://aclu.org:6601 | American Civil Liberties Union National Office
mailto:email@example.com | "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty"