Photo of Melissa Allchin

Melissa Allchin

Subscribe to Melissa Allchin's Posts
Contact:Read more about Melissa Allchin

Recent media coverage highlights incidents relating to enhanced vetting and potential travel bans of foreign nationals by State and Homeland Security officials at US Consulates and US ports of entry. Several countries have issued travel advisories for the United States. While the reported cases impact a limited number of individual travelers, the widespread news has…

President Trump has taken quick action to ramp up immigration enforcement in his first days in office. While Trump’s early focus on deportations and border security is not new, the swift and aggressive enforcement approach represents a significant change as compared to prior administrations. These actions have led to arrests and heightened concerns among employers and employees alike.

What do employers need to know?

Since Trump’s inauguration, there has been a significant increase in targeted enforcement measures against individuals present in the United States who are not U.S. citizens who have a criminal record, and also recent arrivals to the United States who do not hold lawful immigration status. The vast majority of immigration enforcement since January 20 has occurred in private residences and public spaces, though there have been immigration enforcement actions at worksites. There have not been reports of wide-scale worksite raids yet, though the focus may shift to worksite inspections in the next wave of enforcement activities.

Worksite enforcement inspections can take a variety of shapes. In particular, employers should be prepared for the following:

  • Fraud audits in relation to employer-sponsored visa holders;
  • Administrative I-9 audits;
  • Arrests of targeted individuals; or
  • Raids based on suspicion of undocumented workers at worksite facility.

Continue Reading The Post-Inauguration Playbook: Spotlight on Immigration Enforcement and Raids

2024 was a ‘super year’ for elections. Half of the world’s population – some 4.7 billion people – went to the polls in 72 countries. Political shifts often lead to significant changes in employment laws. We’re here to help you prepare for the changes ahead and to stay ahead of the curve on employment law developments…

President-elect Trump’s announced (and rumored) Cabinet member selections confirm that immigration enforcement will be a top priority from day one. With less than two months before inauguration day, US employers should take action now to ensure they are compliant with immigration regulations, are prepared for worksite ICE (Immigration & Customs Enforcement) or DOJ (Department of Justice) raids or enforcement activity and are ready to respond to government investigations or employee complaints regarding the employment of foreign workers.

We recommend the following three steps:

1. Conduct an Internal I-9 Audit

We expect to see a significant rise in worksite inspection and I-9 audits from the incoming administration. All employers are required to verify the work authorization of all employees in the United States by completing and maintaining the Form I-9. Employers should conduct internal I-9 audits every 2-3 years to identify potential liability and make necessary corrections; conducting an internal audit with counsel is a helpful tool to protect the audit under attorney/client privilege. Immediate steps employers can take include:

  • Conduct an internal I-9 audit if one has not been completed in the past 3 years.
  • Review current protocols and conduct internal training to ensure a consistent and complaint work verification procedure and prevent future errors.
  • Review electronic platforms to ensure they are complaint with I-9 regulations and audit ready.

Continue Reading The Pre-Inauguration Playbook: Steps US Employers Should Take to Ensure Immigration Compliance as We Enter a New Era of Enforcement

Donald Trump’s return to the White House in January will have a profound impact on immigration law and enforcement. While the Trump/Vance ticket made immigration a central focus of its campaign, the platform took aim at asylum law and unlawful immigration rather than legal immigration and employer-based immigration. Trump’s first term provides strong clues about potential policy and enforcement changes, though uncertainty remains for employers.

Potential Changes to Employer-Based Immigration

Trump’s first term in office did not result in major legislative changes to immigration law, but enforcement methods and interpretation of existing laws varied drastically from historical norms. Potential changes in a second Trump administration could include:

  • Increased worksite enforcement
  • Restrictions for visas and permanent residence for certain countries
  • Attempts to eliminate the STEM OPT program
  • Attempts to increase prevailing wage rates for H-1B and permanent
    residence processes, aiming to price employers out
  • Increased denials across the board with USCIS and DOS (e.g., 21-24% H-1B denial rate)
  • Increased corporate investigations in relation to protection of US workers (e.g., investigation of PERM practices, hiring practices, and alleged preferential treatment of foreign workers)

Continue Reading Trump Back in Office: What Employers Can Expect Regarding Employer-Based Immigration

We are pleased to share with you The Global Employer – Global Immigration & Mobility Quarterly Update, a collection of key updates from Austria, Italy, Japan, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and the United States.

Click here to view.

This summer SCOTUS published three major decisions impacting workplace immigration decisions. Two of the decisions may require employers to shift their strategies for managing foreign-national talent, and the third essentially preserves the status quo.

Below we outline the impact of the decisions on US-based employers:

1. SCOTUS strengthens the doctrine of consular nonreviewability limiting options for employers and visa applicants who receive unfavorable denial

      In Department of State v. Munoz (July 21, 2024), SCOTUS ruled that US citizens do not have a fundamental liberty interest in their noncitizen spouses’ ability to come to the US.

      In Munoz, the spouse of a US citizen was denied an immigrant visa by a US consulate on ground that the consulate had “reason to believe” the spouse would participate in illicit activity if admitted to the US. The consular denial provided limited explanation for the decision – simply citing the “reason to believe” statute (a legal standard under which foreign nationals can be barred from entering the country if USCIS has a “reason to believe” the individual has been involved in illicit or illegal conduct) – and was extremely slow in providing this basis for its decision. The US citizen petitioning spouse sought judicial review and argued that she had a liberty interest in the matter given her US citizenship and that the impact of the consular decision deprived her of the fundamental right to marriage. But after receiving a favorable decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court reversed and held that no such liberty interest exists in this context.

      While the facts of Munoz did not involve a US employer, the underlying doctrine at issue – the ability to challenge a consulate’s decision on a visa – has direct implications to US employers who seek employment-based visas for employees. In reversing the Ninth Circuit’s decision, the Court upheld and arguably expanded the doctrine of “consular nonreviewability” – i.e. the inability to challenge the decision of a consular officer in US federal court.

      Takeaway:

      Munoz leaves employers and visa applicants with limited, if any, means for judicial redress in the event of an incorrect or unjust consular decision. Other avenues for challenging an unfavorable decision exist – including requesting supervisory review, review from the State Department’s Legal Net, or re-filing the application – but these fall short of and lack the teeth of formal judicial review.Continue Reading Triple Feature: SCOTUS Issues 3 Blockbuster Immigration Decisions This Summer Impacting Employers and Foreign National Employers