Overview
Title
To expand the use of E-Verify to hold employers accountable, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The bill wants all bosses to use a special computer system called E-Verify to make sure they only hire people who are allowed to work in the country. If they don't use it, they might have to pay big fines or lose important contracts.
Summary AI
The bill S. 1151, titled the “Accountability Through Electronic Verification Act,” aims to expand and make mandatory the use of the E-Verify system for employment eligibility verification across the United States. It requires all federal government departments, federal contractors, and private employers to use E-Verify, and establishes penalties for noncompliance, including fines and potential debarment from federal contracts. The bill also outlines new procedures for identity verification to prevent unauthorized employment and identity theft, and calls for improved information sharing among federal agencies to enforce immigration laws. Additionally, the bill proposes the creation of a program to help small businesses use E-Verify and an Employer Compliance Inspection Center to ensure adherence to employment verification laws.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The bill, titled the "Accountability Through Electronic Verification Act," seeks to expand the use of the E-Verify system to ensure that employers verify the work eligibility of their employees. It mandates that all federal agencies, contractors, and all employers within the United States use E-Verify to confirm the legal work status of their employees. Additionally, it outlines penalties for non-compliance and enhances measures to prevent identity theft, among other provisions.
Summary of Significant Issues
One key concern is the bill's requirement for universal participation in E-Verify without offering financial support or clear penalties for non-compliance. This could place a financial burden on smaller businesses that may lack the resources to implement the system effectively. Furthermore, by permanently reauthorizing the E-Verify program without a congressional review, the bill raises questions about accountability and oversight.
The bill also outlines significantly increased penalties for those who fail to comply with E-Verify requirements. However, the lack of clear standards for these penalties could lead to legal challenges. Additionally, the preemption of state and local laws on employment verification might create friction between federal and local governments, as regulatory powers become centralized at the federal level.
There are also privacy concerns regarding the sharing of personal data between various government agencies, as well as the necessity for employers to submit weekly reports, which could become an administrative burden. Moreover, certain terms such as "good faith" and "critical employers" are not clearly defined, leading to potential inconsistencies in application and enforcement.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, the bill could enhance the verification process for employment eligibility, potentially reducing the number of unauthorized workers in the United States. However, the expanded use of E-Verify might lead to privacy concerns if personal data is not adequately protected. The administrative burden of compliance, especially for smaller businesses, could be significant, impacting their operational efficiency.
For workers, this bill could increase the likelihood of wrongful terminations due to errors in the E-Verify system, as the liability protection offered to employers might discourage thorough due diligence when dealing with non-confirmation results. These workers may face challenges in contesting these results, given the lack of a clear recourse system.
Impact on Stakeholders
Employers, particularly small businesses, are likely to face the most significant impact. Implementing the E-Verify system without financial support could be costly, and there could be legal ramifications from potentially vague mandates and increased penalties. Larger businesses and federal contractors might have more resources to implement these systems but still could face substantial administrative burdens.
Federal agencies and the entities tasked with enforcing these mandates may benefit from clearer legislation but will need to handle substantial data and potential challenges related to data integrity and privacy.
Workers will need to navigate this system, and those who are incorrectly flagged as unauthorized might have trouble quickly rectifying their status due to systemic errors or delays. As a result, they may face undue stress and potential job loss without robust protective measures or an effective system for challenging erroneous findings.
In summary, while the intention of ensuring that individuals working in the U.S. are authorized is clear, this bill brings forth complex issues that need addressing to ensure an equitable and efficient implementation, with mindful consideration of privacy and resource allocation for all stakeholders involved.
Financial Assessment
The Accountability Through Electronic Verification Act introduces several financial implications, primarily revolving around penalties for non-compliance and enhanced enforcement mechanisms.
Financial Penalties
The bill mandates significant increases in fines for employers who fail to comply with E-Verify requirements. Specifically, violations of the Immigration and Nationality Act can result in penalties ranging from $2,500 to $25,000, depending on the severity and frequency of the offense. For example, the fine for a first-time violation increases from $250-$2,000 to $2,500-$5,000, while a third-time violation sees an increase from $3,000-$10,000 to $10,000-$25,000. Additionally, a criminal penalty stipulates fines of up to $30,000 for each unauthorized alien involved in repeated violations, coupled with the possibility of imprisonment for up to ten years.
These financial penalties are intended to deter employers from hiring unauthorized workers, thereby reinforcing the mandatory use of E-Verify. However, this approach may create a substantial financial burden for small businesses, which is a concern highlighted in the issues section. Smaller enterprises may struggle to meet compliance costs, especially since the bill does not specify financial support measures to help them implement and operate the E-Verify system.
Debarment from Federal Contracts
The legislation also outlines financial consequences for entities that repeatedly violate E-Verify requirements. These include debarment from receiving federal contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements. Debarment can significantly impact an entity's financial standing by limiting access to lucrative federal opportunities. The potential to be placed on the List of Parties Excluded From Federal Procurement for five years further underscores the financial risks associated with non-compliance.
Implications for Federal Expenditure
The establishment of the Employer Compliance Inspection Center aims to ensure consistent application of employment verification laws. While this proposal may enhance enforcement, it also poses an issue related to federal spending. The bill does not define metrics for efficiency, raising concerns about potential wasteful expenditure without clear oversight or operational guidelines.
Lack of Financial Support for Small Businesses
One notable omission in the bill is the absence of financial support or subsidies for small businesses to comply with the expanded E-Verify system. Although the bill proposes a Small Business Demonstration Program, which aims to assist small businesses in rural areas with access to E-Verify, it does not specify financial allocations or support to facilitate this transition. Without explicit financial assistance, small businesses may face operational challenges, reinforcing the concern that mandatory participation could strain smaller employers financially.
Conclusion
The financial elements within the Accountability Through Electronic Verification Act focus heavily on penalties and enforcement costs. While these financial measures aim to deter non-compliance, they may inadvertently burden small businesses, potentially leading to economic strain without adequate financial support. Additionally, the absence of defined metrics for federal expenditure in certain enforcement aspects raises concerns about resource allocation and effectiveness.
Issues
The mandatory use of E-Verify for all employers without providing financial support or penalties for non-compliance (Sections 3 and 4) could lead to financial strain, particularly for smaller businesses, and insufficient enforcement mechanisms.
The permanent reauthorization of the E-Verify pilot program (Section 2) removes any termination date, potentially allowing the program to continue indefinitely without congressional review or reassessment, raising concerns about accountability and oversight.
The section on consequences of failure to participate (Section 4) introduces significantly increased penalties and the presumption of violation without clear standards or explanations, which might be legally contentious.
The preemption clause (Section 5) limits state and local authority over employment verification, possibly causing tension between federal and state/local governments over regulatory powers.
The liability protection for those using E-Verify (Section 5) could encourage careless use of the system, as entities are shielded from legal consequences for employment-related actions based on E-Verify outputs, even if errors occur.
The expanded use of E-Verify (Section 6) does not address privacy protections for individuals and lacks clarity on the mandatory or optional nature of pre-employment verification, which could lead to confusion among employers.
The requirement for employers to report weekly to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (Section 8) and the associated interagency nonconfirmation report could lead to privacy concerns and administrative burdens.
The lack of clear definitions for critical terms like 'good faith' in exemptions from penalties (Section 4), 'critical employers' (Section 3), and 'small business' (Section 13) may lead to inconsistent application and confusion.
The establishment of the Employer Compliance Inspection Center (Section 14) may increase federal expenditure without defined metrics for efficiency, possibly resulting in wasteful spending.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title; table of contents Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The "Accountability Through Electronic Verification Act" includes several sections that outline provisions such as the permanent reauthorization of E-Verify, mandatory participation, and the consequences for failing to use the system. Additionally, it discusses topics like employer accountability, identity theft prevention, and the design and operation of E-Verify, as well as a demonstration program aimed at small businesses.
2. Permanent reauthorization Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section changes the law to remove the requirement for the Secretary of Homeland Security to end a specific program related to immigration by a set date, allowing the program to continue unless Congress decides otherwise.
3. Mandatory use of E-Verify Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section mandates that all departments and agencies of the Federal Government, federal contractors, and employers considered critical to national security must use the E-Verify system to check the work eligibility of their employees. Additionally, all employers in the United States will be required to participate in E-Verify one year after the law is enacted, with specific provisions for interim mandatory participation for those suspected of immigration law violations.
4. Consequences of failure to participate Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The text outlines the penalties for failing to participate in the E-Verify program, which checks employment eligibility in the U.S. It includes updated fines for violations, allows penalties to be reduced or waived if the violator shows good faith, grants the Secretary of Homeland Security the authority to ban violators from federal contracts, and establishes penalties for repeat violations, including fines, imprisonment, and debarment from federal procurement for up to five years.
Money References
- (a) In general.—Section 402(e)(5) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1324a note), as redesignated by section 3(b)(1), is amended to read as follows: “(5) CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURE TO PARTICIPATE.—If a person or other entity that is required to participate in E-Verify fails to comply with the requirements under this title with respect to an individual— “(A) such failure shall be treated as a violation of section 274A(a)(1)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a) with respect to such individual; and “(B) a rebuttable presumption is created that the person or entity has violated section 274A(a)(1)(A) of such Act.”. (b) Penalties.—Section 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a) is amended— (1) in subsection (e)— (A) in paragraph (4)— (i) in subparagraph (A)— (I) in the matter preceding clause (i), by inserting “, subject to paragraph (10),” after “in an amount”; (II) in clause (i), by striking “not less than $250 and not more than $2,000” and inserting “not less than $2,500 and not more than $5,000”; (III) in clause (ii), by striking “not less than $2,000 and not more than $5,000” and inserting “not less than $5,000 and not more than $10,000”; and (IV) in clause (iii), by striking “not less than $3,000 and not more than $10,000” and inserting “not less than $10,000 and not more than $25,000”; and (ii) by amending subparagraph (B) to read as follows: “(B) may require the person or entity to take such other remedial action as is appropriate.”; (B) in paragraph (5)— (i) by striking “of not less than $100 and not more than $1,000” and inserting “, subject to paragraphs (10) through (12), of not less than $1,000 and not more than $25,000”; (ii) by striking “the size of the business of the employer being charged, the good faith of the employer” and inserting “the good faith of the employer being charged”; and (iii) by adding at the end the following: “Failure by a person or entity to utilize the employment eligibility verification system as required by law, or providing information to the system that the person or entity knows or reasonably believes to be false, shall be treated as a violation of subsection (a)(1)(A).”; and (C) by adding at the end the following: “(10) EXEMPTION FROM PENALTY.—In the case of the imposition of a civil penalty under paragraph (4)(A) with respect to a violation of paragraph (1)(A) or (2) of subsection (a) for hiring, continuation of employment, recruitment, or referral by a person or entity and, in the case of the imposition of a civil penalty under paragraph (5) for a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) for hiring, recruitment, or referral by a person or entity, the penalty otherwise imposed may be waived or reduced if the violator establishes that the violator acted in good faith.
- REVIEW.—Any decision to debar a person or entity under in accordance with this paragraph shall be reviewable pursuant to part 9.4 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation.”; and (2) in subsection (f)— (A) by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows: “(1) CRIMINAL PENALTY.—Any person or entity which engages in a pattern or practice of violations of paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (a) shall be fined not more than $30,000 for each unauthorized alien with respect to which such a violation occurs, imprisoned for not less than 1 year and not more than 10 years, or both, notwithstanding the provisions of any other Federal law relating to fine levels.”; and (B) in paragraph (2), by striking “Attorney General” each place such term appears and inserting “Secretary of Homeland Security”.
5. Preemption; liability Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section clarifies that states or local governments cannot stop people or companies from using E-Verify to check whether their employees are allowed to work. It also states that those participating in E-Verify aren't legally responsible if they fire someone based on incorrect information from the system, as long as they acted in good faith.
6. Expanded use of E-Verify Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines changes to how employers use the E-Verify system. Before hiring, employers can check if a person is eligible to work in the U.S. with the individual's consent, and must follow specific procedures if there are issues. After offering a job, they must check employment eligibility within three days, and all current employees who haven't been previously verified must be checked using E-Verify within a year of the law's enactment.
7. Reverification Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Each employer using E-Verify must check the work authorization of an employee again within 3 days before their current permission to work expires, following the specified process.
8. Holding employers accountable Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill requires employers to terminate employees if they receive a final nonconfirmation from E-Verify, a system used to check eligibility for employment, and to report relevant information to the Secretary of Homeland Security. It also mandates that the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services submit weekly reports on nonconfirmations to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to help enforce immigration laws.
9. Information sharing Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires the heads of various U.S. government agencies, including Social Security and Internal Revenue, to create a program within a year to share information that may help identify unauthorized aliens, based on specific immigration laws.
10. Form I–9 process Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit a report to Congress within nine months after the law is enacted. This report should include suggestions on how to make the Form I-9 process easier for employers and consider whether the process should be eliminated altogether.
11. Design and operation of E-Verify Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section explains that the E-Verify system should be designed to be reliable and easy for employers to use, protect personal information, and respond accurately to employer inquiries. It also outlines measures to detect and prevent fraud and unauthorized use, confirms workers' identity and authorization using various government records, and ensures document authenticity through digital photographs and temporary procedures if needed.
12. Identity theft Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill amends Section 1028 of title 18, United States Code, to change the language regarding identity theft, specifying that it involves using identifying information that is not one's own. It also adds penalties for facilitating or assisting in harboring or hiring unauthorized workers, violating certain sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
13. Small Business Demonstration Program Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to introduce a new Small Business Demonstration Program. This program, to be established by the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, aims to help small businesses in rural areas or places without internet access verify the employment eligibility of their new employees using publicly accessible internet terminals.
14. Employer Compliance Inspection Center Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section establishes the Employer Compliance Inspection Center within U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to ensure businesses follow employment eligibility laws by applying penalties and conducting audits. It also sets up a task force to investigate crimes like Social Security and tax fraud in partnership with other federal agencies.