AILA provides a series of 12 charts comparing President Biden’s accomplishments 100 days after entering office with the comprehensive recommendations AILA presented to the president.View All
AILALink puts an entire immigration law library at your fingertips! Search the AILALink database for all your practice needs—statutes, regs, case law, agency guidance, publications, and more.
AILA Doc. No. 11052610 | Dated May 26, 2011
WASHINGTON, DC -- The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) is troubled by today’s Supreme Court decision to uphold the Arizona Legal Workers Act, a law that threatens to revoke the business licenses of companies in that state if they knowingly hire unauthorized immigrants and requires that Arizona businesses participate in the federal E-Verify program which Congress enacted as a voluntary “pilot program.” AILA agrees with Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who said that the majority reading of the law “subjects employers to a patchwork of enforcement schemes similar to the one that Congress sought to displace when it enacted IRCA.”
The decision did not address Arizona’s infamous SB 1070, the more high-profile Arizona immigration law which requires police to check the immigration status of individuals in certain circumstances. The main provisions of SB 1070 were successfully challenged in federal court on constitutional grounds and are on appeal.
According to David Leopold, President of AILA, “Today’s Supreme Court decision is no predictor of how the Court will come out on SB1070. The majority opinion appears to have turned on a narrow and technical reading of the ‘savings clause’ in IRCA that references state licensing laws. Those who might take some comfort from this decision, hoping that other state laws such as Arizona SB 1070 might be upheld, should pay close attention to the court's affirmation that state laws violate the Constitution if ‘they impose additional burdens on the Federal government.’”
Leopold added, “What is particularly troubling about this decision is the danger of a muddled mix of state immigration laws, each of which claims to essentially track the federal law, but each of which has its own tweaks and nuances. It will be extremely burdensome and expensive for employers who operate in multiple states across the country, and who wish, in good faith, to comply with our immigration laws, to ensure not only federal compliance but also compliance on a state-by-state level.”
Cite as AILA Doc. No. 11052610.
American Immigration Lawyers Association
1331 G Street NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20005
Copyright © 1993-2021
American Immigration Lawyers Association.
AILA.org should not be relied upon as the exclusive source for your legal research. Nothing on AILA.org constitutes legal advice, and information on AILA.org is not a substitute for independent legal advice based on a thorough review and analysis of the facts of each individual case, and independent research based on statutory and regulatory authorities, case law, policy guidance, and for procedural issues, federal government websites.