Another Small Business Owner Arrested For Not Complying With Employment Laws
Michel Malecot, an owner of a popular San Diego restaurant, French Gourmet, was arrested today for hiring undocumented immigrants workers. He was indicted on 12 felony counts of knowingly hiring illegal immigrants, which could lead to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine per count. The unique of this case is that the government is trying to seize Malecot’s restaurant using forfeiture laws. For complete story, click on the following link.
When does my presence in the United States starts to count as unlawful presence once the judge grants voluntary departure?
Once the judge issues the voluntary departure order, you have 90 days from the date of the order to depart the United States. The time incurred between the voluntary departure date and the date you choose to depart does not count towards your unlawful presence. It is advisable though to depart before that period runs out because if you do not leave within 90 days, you will accrue unlawful presence and that unlawful presence will bar you from returning to the United States in the future.
Please note if you want to remain in the United States because you are seeking review from the BIA of the removal order, voluntary departure period will not run while the BIA appeal is pending. However, that is not the case if you appeal to the court of appeals. As you know with anything else, these rules may change. Thus, it is imperative to consult an immigration attorney before forming a decision.
House Bill 978 may impact your business assets/vehicles
The State of House of Representatives recently passed House Bill 978, which allows state authorities to seize any vehicle involved in a traffic violation or accident if it’s driven by an illegal immigrant, which includes rented and leased vehicles if the owner knew, or should have known that the driver is an illegal immigrant. If this bill becomes effective, anyone involved in an accident or even minor traffic infraction would be required to prove that the person is a United States citizen or risk loosing his/her vehicle. On the surface, this law appears to be fair since this would mean that those who break the law would be forced to reimburse the system at least in a small way. The end result, however, would require the state police to become proficient in immigration law since they would be required to seize vehicles based on immigration status. Otherwise, how would they determine if a person with expired greed card or adjustment of status does not mean that the person is here illegally? How would the police be able to determine a driver was illegal immigrant during a traffic stop? Would the inquiry be based on color or accent of the driver? Would the owner of the vehicle be required to prove that they did not know the immigration status of the driver? Would this bill work like the property seizure laws in drug offense cases? If this HB 978 becomes effective, business owners might be required to provide sworn affidavits to prove that they did not know the immigration status of the driver. They may even be required to testify in a hearing or risk loosing their vehicle.
Is there a way to avoid removal proceedings and what are the benefits of voluntary departure?
There are defenses to deportation or removal proceedings such as cancellation of removal or voluntary departure. However, determining whether you qualify for one of these defenses depends on many factors. One of those factors is whether the non-immigrant (you) entered the country with or without inspection (inspection does not mean with or without a visa) or if you violated one of the terms. Another factor is whether a removal of non-immigrant would cause an extreme hardship to a United States citizen (USC) spouse or a child.
Because the first two factors are complicated to explain this post, we will only focus on the third factor, which to cancellation of removal based on extreme hardship to a USC. To qualify for a defense based on an extreme hardship, a non-immigrant must be married to a United States citizen and/or have children(s) or parent(s) who are United States citizens. Of course, there are various other factors that a non-immigrant must show in order to qualify for any of the defenses mentioned above, which an attorney must evaluate before forming an opinion whether you qualify for one of these defenses.
A point to remember is that even if a cancellation of removal is not available as a defense, a voluntary departure is a desirable alternative than deportation because it helps a non-immigrant preserve his/her right to return to the United States in the near future. However, not everyone qualifies for a voluntary departure. More importantly, overstaying the voluntary departure period could subject the non-immigrant to severe penalties. Thus, it is imperative that a non-immigrant hire an attorney for deportation advice before his/her court date to determine a type of relief available.
What is the purpose of E-Verify?
The purpose of E-Verify is to help employers verify employment authorization documents of a newly hired employees. Once the employer collects verification documents, the participating employer can electronically submit the information to USCIS for verification. In case, the documents do not match, the program requires employers to resolve discrepancies between their employee records and those of the Social Security Administration and/or the Department of Homeland Security. This program is problematic because once the employer is notified of the discrepancy, the employer must make a decision to either terminate the employment or continue the employment and risk criminal and/or civil penalties for non-compliance. Either step is problematic for employers because an employer could be sued for wrongful termination or as mentioned above risk criminal and/or civil penalties for noncompliance.
For more information about E-Verify, visit: https://www.vis-dhs.com/EmployerRegistration