Court Extends Order That Blocks Government From Implementing Flawed Social Security No Match Rule (10/1/2007)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: media@aclu.org
SAN FRANCISCO - After a hearing today, a federal judge extended an
order that temporarily stops the government from implementing a new
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) rule that would cause U.S.
citizens and other authorized workers to lose their jobs, and which
would illegally use error-prone social security records as a tool for
immigration enforcement. The judge's order also stops the Social
Security Administration (SSA) from beginning to send notices to
approximately 140,000 employers across the country notifying them of
the new rule, which would impact approximately eight million workers.
The temporary restraining order is not to exceed ten days.
"We are pleased that the judge saw the need to continue to block this
rule that would lead to increased exploitation of workers,”
said John Sweeney, President of the American Federation of Labor and
Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO). “More than
70% of SSA discrepancies refer to U.S. citizens but the DHS regulation
would encourage employers to fire any worker based on these erroneous
discrepancies, especially if she has an accent or is perceived to be
foreign born.”
Today’s order comes as a result of a lawsuit filed in August
by the AFL-CIO, the American Civil Liberties Union, the National
Immigration Law Center (NILC) and the Central Labor Council of Alameda
County along with other local labor movements. In the lawsuit, the
groups charge that the misguided rule violates the law and workers'
rights, imposes burdensome obligations on employers, and will cause
discrimination against workers who are perceived to be immigrants.
For years the SSA has sent “no match” letters to
employers if the name and social security information reported by a
worker on a W-2 form does not match up with the information contained
in SSA databases. The “no match” letters were never
considered reason to believe that an employee did not have permission
to work in the U.S, and currently employers who receive "no match"
letters are not required to take any action. In fact, there are many
innocent reasons for such discrepancies such as clerical mistakes, name
changes due to marriage and divorce, and the use of multiple surnames
that are common in many parts of the world.
Under the new DHS rule, employers receiving “no
match” letters might be required to fire employees whose SSA
discrepancies are not resolved within 90 days after the "no match"
letter is received. If the employer does not respond to a
“no match” letter, DHS may conclude that the
employer had “constructive knowledge” that an
employee was not authorized to work in the U.S. and prosecute the
employer accordingly.
Today's order was handed down in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of California.
In addition to the AFL-CIO, which is represented by the law firm of
Altshuler Berzon LLP, other parties bringing the lawsuit include the
Central Labor Council of Alameda County, represented by the ACLU, the
ACLU of Northern California, and NILC, as well as the San Francisco
Labor Council and the San Francisco Building and Construction Trades
Council, represented by Weinberg, Roger and Rosenfeld.
Lawyers on the case include Scott A. Kronland, Stephen Berzon, Jonathan
Weissglass, Linda Lye and Danielle Leonard of Altshuler Berzon LLP;
Jonathan Hiatt, James Coppess and Ana Avendaño of the
AFL-CIO; Lucas Guttentag, Jennifer Chang, Mónica M.
Ramírez and Omar Jadwat of the ACLU Immigrants' Rights
Project; Alan Schlosser and Julia Mass of the ACLU of Northern
California; Marielena Hincapié, Linton Joaquin and Monica
Guizar of NILC; and David Rosenfeld and Manjari Chawla of Weinberg,
Roger and Rosenfeld.
The complaint, a complete list of plaintiffs, and other information
about the lawsuit can be found at: www.aclu.org/nomatch
|