1,000 FORM I-9 AUDITS ANNOUNCED

News Release:
1,000 NEW WORKPLACE AUDITS ANNOUNCED
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Assistant Secretary John Morton announced today the issuance of Notices of Inspection(NOIs) to1,000 employers across the country associated with critical infrastructure . ICE will be auditing their hiring records to determine the compliance with employment eligibility verification laws.

The 1,000 businesses that were served with audit notices this week, were selected as a result of investigative leads and intelligence and because of the nature of the business’ and their connection to public safety.

Audits involve a comprehensive review of Form I-9’s, which employers are required to complete and retain for each individual hired in the U.S. I-9 forms require that employers review and record each individual’s identity and work eligibility and determine the authenticity of the documents supplied by the future employee. Audits may result in civil penalties and lay the groundwork for criminal prosecution for those employers who knowingly violate the law. ICE has identified for I-9 audits as one of the most important tools in building criminal cases and bringing employers into compliance with the law.

STATISTICS SINCE IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW ICE WORKSITE ENFORCEMENT STRATEGY
ON APRIL 30:
45 Businesses and 47 individuals debarred;
0 Businesses and 1 individual was debarred during the same period in 2008
142 Notices of Intent to Fine(NIF) totaling $15,865,181.00;
ICE issued 32 NIF’s for all of 2008, with a total of 2,355,330.00
45 Final orders totaling $798,179.00;
ICE issued 8 final orders in 2008, totaling 196,523.00, during the same time frame in 2008
1,897 cases initiated;
ICE initiated 605 cases for the same time period in 2008
1, 069 Form I-9 inspections;
ICE initiated 503 Form I-9 inspections for all of 2008

In July, ICE issued 654 NOI’s to businesses nationwide in the largest operation of its kind before today.

STATISTICS RESULTING FROM THE 654 AUDITS ANNOUNCED IN JULY:

· ICE agents reviewed more than 85,000 Form I-9s and identified more than 14,000 suspect documents
· TO date, 61 NIFs have been issued, resulting in 2,310,255.00 in fines. In addition, 267 cases are currently being considered for NIFs
· ICE closed 326 cases after businesses were found to be in compliance with employment laws or after businesses were served with a Warning Notice in expectation of future compliance.

For more information regarding Form I-9's and employer compliance, please visit our website at: www.immigrationisssues.com

Bookmark this post with:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

By Aaron Hall, Associate Attorney: I am used to attending interviews with clients at United States Customs and Immigration Services (USCIS). Recently, I got to go to an interview in a different role and it was a very different experience. My wife is from Peru and we were applying to adjust her status so that she could be a permanent resident of the United States. The process started months before with the submission of the I-485 packet to USCIS. We thoroughly documented the packet with photos, emails, letters, bills, and a letter written by us about how we met, fell in love, and got married.

As an immigration attorney, I would say that our case was as simple as they get: no criminal history, no history of immigration violations, and my wife had never been in the United States without status. With the thorough documentation we were submitting, there would not be any issues or problems. Still, as we waited to be interviewed at USCIS regarding our application we both admitted to being a little bit nervous. The officer eventually called our names and we went back to his office to be interviewed. Some of the slight issues and interesting exchanges that came up were as follows:

The officer asked if we had ever spoken about getting an immigration benefit before getting married. From the tone of this question, it seemed that if we answered ‘yes,’ the officer would conclude we had only gotten married for immigration reasons. For us, the truthful answer was that we had discussed the fact that she would file for adjustment of status shortly after we married. This was always going to be the case, particularly because my wife entered the country on a fiancé visa which required us to get married and file for adjustment of status within 90 days of her entry. So yes, we had discussed that she would file to become a permanent resident before we got married. But the way the question was posed made us feel like such an answer would cause problems.

The officer asked if she had changed her last name. My wife happens to have a beautiful last name which she feels is part of her identity. She is keeping her family name and I of course fully support her on that. The officer, seemingly skeptical about why she would not change her name, wanted an explanation for this and seemingly could not believe that she wouldn’t change her name after getting married. The officer asked about my wife’s ‘last entry’ into the United States. My wife speaks English fluently, but she and the officer were misunderstanding each other on this. My wife was thinking that by ‘last entry’, the officer was referring to the last time before ‘this time.’ She explained that she had come in on a different kind of visa. It took several exchanges to clarify that by last entry, he meant ‘this time.’ Once this was clear, my wife told him the date when she entered the United States on a fiancé visa. But the officer, mistakenly looking at a stamp which indicated the expiration of the fiancé visa, was incredulous and asked her about the ‘later entry.’ We were both thrown off guard because we knew that she had not left the country since she entered on the fiancé visa. The officer thought that my wife might be misstating her last entry. Finally, amidst the tense confusion, the officer showed us the stamp he was looking at. I saw that it actually was the expiration of her fiancé status and was not a separate entry. I explained this and he looked at the stamp again and then agreed that her original answer was satisfactory. The officer asked about whether we had exchanged wedding rings. We told him that we have not yet exchanged rings. He was surprised to hear that a married couple could possibly not have exchanged wedding rings. My wife tearfully explained that leaving her country and her family to live in the United States was one of the most difficult things she’s ever done and that her one condition was that we would have a religious wedding ceremony in her country. She explained that she wanted both of our families to be present at that celebration and that to ensure that it was as special as possible, we were waiting to exchange rings at that ceremony.

We went into the USCIS interview knowing that we had a good application, that we had a simple case, and that we had nothing to hide. Still, the USCIS interview was a stressful experience with a number of miscommunications making the experience all the more difficult. The officer was at all times professional and was simply doing his job, but the interview was certainly not a comfortable hour. Afterwards my wife and I were talking about how if it was so stressful for us—with my familiarity with the process, with our thorough application and supporting documents, and with no criminal history or immigration violations, and with her command of the English language—we can only imagine the stress that it must cause for those with less knowledge of English, of the process, or with more complicated legal issues.

My personal experience with the USCIS process just reaffirmed the fact that submitting an application to USCIS and attending an interview can cause great anxiety. As attorneys, we know our role is to limit that anxiety by submitting thoroughly documented applications, preparing clients for the interview by explaining exactly how the process will play out and what types of questions they can expect, and by making sure that we have prepared for any legal issues that may arise in a particular case. Only through this thorough and meticulous preparation can we properly serve our clients and help them through this stressful process.

Bookmark this post with:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
•