Judge blocks letters
Judge blocks letters

By Devona Walker

Published: October 11, 2007

A federal judge has stopped the Department of Homeland Security from sending out thousands of "no-match” letters, saying Wednesday it was unfairly burdensome on legal workers and their employers.

"No-match” letters were intended to go out, beginning Sept. 14, to employers with workers whose names do not match their Social Security numbers. They would have accompanied a U.S. Department of Homeland Security insert stipulating that it is unlawful to hire illegal immigrants. It would also give the employer 90 days to fix the discrepancy or terminate the worker.

"The government's proposal to disseminate no-match letters affecting more than eight million workers will, under the mandated time line, result in the termination of lawfully employed workers,” wrote U.S. District Court Judge Charles R. Breyer. "If allowed to proceed, the mailing of no-match letters, accompanied by DHS's guidance letter, would result in irreparable harm to innocent workers and employers.”

In the lawsuit, the groups argue the rule violates the law and workers' rights, imposes burdensome obligations on employers, and will cause discrimination against workers who are perceived to be immigrants. Several other labor and business groups joined in the lawsuit to challenge the rule. Wednesday's ruling extends that prohibition indefinitely until the court issues a final decision in the case after trial.

"This is a significant step towards overturning this unlawful rule, which would give employers an even stronger way to keep workers from freely forming unions,” said John Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO, in a statement.

Department of Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff said the order reiterates the importance of comprehensive immigration reform.

DHS is still reviewing its options: Either to appeal the judge's order, revise the rule or forego this particular tool and simply rely on existing worksite enforcement strategies.

"President Bush made clear in August that we are going to do as much administratively as we can, within the boundaries of existing law, to further secure our borders and enforce our immigration laws,” Chertoff said. "Today's ruling is yet another reminder of why we need Congress to enact comprehensive immigration reform. The American people have been loud and clear about their desire to see our nation's immigration laws enforced.”

Immigration attorney Jasmine Majid, of Crowe & Dunlevy in Oklahoma City, wonders if the no-match rule was a political maneuver to get something rolling on comprehensive immigration reform.

"It's so severe, and who does it hit? It hits a pretty large group of people,” she said.

Originally, the purpose of no-match letters was to find an avenue for legal workers to be credited with their earnings.

"Now, they are adding another layer. They are assuming constructive knowledge on the employer if they receive a no-match letter,” Majid said. "Especially for small employers, it's a time-consuming process. The processes in place are not necessarily beneficial to resolving this in an efficient or effective manner. When you have these problems and you impose responsibility on the party that's supposed to be benefiting from your service, it's not fair.”

Your thoughts!