HAZLETON PA. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
But a U.S. district judge’s recent decision that Hazleton had usurped federal authority came shortly before the Bush administration unveiled new rules this month to fine employers who fail to fire workers whose Social Security account information varies from government records. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
Both the surge in state and municipal laws and the federal Homeland Security rule to curb illegal immigration appear prompted by Congress’ recent failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform legislation. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff announced that the government’s new crackdown will require employers to fire workers who have been found to use false or questionable Social Security numbers. The new rule, which goes into effect in September, will force businesses to sack any individuals who can’t be verified as legal and who can’t resolve within 90 days why the name or Social Security number on their W-2 doesn’t match the government’s database. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
The Social Security Administration has sent “no match” letters to employers and workers for years, but employers were responsible only for notifying workers of the discrepancies. Under the new rule, employers who do not fire the workers upon notification could be fined $250 to $10,000 per illegal worker and incident. That would represent a 25-percent boost in previous fines. The Social Security Administration said it plans to send out about 15,000 “no match” letters a week to businesses over a two-month period. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
An estimated 1.4 million illegal immigrants work in the foodservice industry. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
Even after the federal judge struck down Hazleton’s law, ruling that the U.S. government is responsible for controlling immigration and that the city had overstepped its bounds with an ordinance threatening to revoke the license of any business owner who employs illegal immigrants, local restaurateurs remained puzzled. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
“It’s been blown out of proportion by the media,” said John Peters, owner of Hazleton’s eight-year-old Tex-Mex restaurant Juan Pedro’s Cantina. “Hasn’t it always been a federal law that illegal immigrants are not allowed to work in this country?” —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
Given stepped-up efforts to crack down on illegal immigration at both the local and federal levels, industry officials maintain that the court’s decision striking down the Hazleton ordinance should be positioned squarely in the forefront of the national debate on immigration. Many see the decision by U.S. District Judge James M. Munley as a potential weapon against the growing number of state and local lawmakers determined to take on immigration themselves in the absence of federal reform. The restaurant industry largely favors comprehensive federal reform. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
Calling the Hazleton ruling “a great decision,” Scott Vinson, vice president of government relations for the National Council of Chain Restaurants, said Munley’s ruling is “rich with material that can be used in future litigation.” —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
George Paul Tzamaras, director of communications for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said his organization also welcomed the federal court’s decision. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
“We believe [immigration] is a federal issue,” he said. “We understand state and local frustration about it, but that isn’t the way to handle it. The system is broken, and there is a need for comprehensive immigration reform.” —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
Many industry officials have expressed frustration with Congress over its inability to enact reform that would create a system enabling employers to hire noncitizens when U.S. workers aren’t available while also establishing a path to citizenship for undocumented workers already here. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
But the legislative gridlock on Capitol Hill and the growing national resentment over illegal immigration have spurred initiatives at the state and local level. A report by the National Conference of State Legislatures says state lawmakers considered more than 1,400 immigration measures this year—more than two-and-a-half times the number of such bills that had been introduced in 2006. State legislators have enacted 170 immigration bills this year, more than twice as many as the 84 measures passed last year, the NCSL said. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
“Congress’ inability to act has opened the flood gates for illegal-immigration measures at the state and local level,” said John Gay, senior vice president of government affairs and public policy for the National Restaurant Association. “It’s Congress’ responsibility to pass laws that regulate immigration, and they have failed to do so.” —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
Instead, Gay said, federal officials are looking to address the problem by passing “rifle-shot enforcement measures”—like the Department of Homeland Security’s crackdown on illegal immigrants using falsified Social Security numbers. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
Meanwhile, lawmakers in all 50 states have addressed immigration issues over the past year, and more than 40 of those states already have enacted immigration laws, several of which contain strict employer penalties. Arizona passed a law this year declaring that employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants can have their business licenses suspended for a first offense and lose their licenses for a second offense. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
Now Arizona’s restaurateurs will be required to use the federal government’s employment verification system, or EVS, a database developed to show whether an individual has been authorized by the government to work in the United States. But officials familiar with the system say it is badly flawed and is not set up to handle the amount of traffic it would receive if its use becomes mandatory around the country. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
In addition, operators in Arizona are concern about verifying workers’ documentation. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
“You can go out on the street here and buy a Social Security card, driver’s license and a credit card for $160,” said Steve Chucri, president and chief executive of the Arizona Restaurant & Hospitality Association. “And if these things are fooling law enforcement officers, how are business owners supposed to deal with it?” —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
The Arizona restaurant association has joined with other business groups in a lawsuit challenging the law. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
Other states, like Oklahoma, also have passed laws requiring employers to use the federal government’s EVS. Jim Hopper, president and chief executive of the Oklahoma Restaurant Association, echoed concerns about EVS. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
“Based on everything we’ve heard, the basic pilot project [EVS] doesn’t work very well,” he said, adding that ORA planned to challenge the bill. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
Colorado lawmakers have enacted a tough series of immigration laws that include one making restaurateurs and other employers subject to steep fines for documentation infractions. That law requires businesses to retain written or electronic copies of records that verify the identity and employment eligibility of workers hired after Jan. 1. It also says that business owners must file an “affirmation” stating that they have examined the legal work status of the employee and did not knowingly hire an unauthorized worker. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
“Many employers were already keeping copies of the documents, so for some it is nothing new,” said Pete Meersman, president and chief executive of the Colorado Restaurant Association. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
However, the new law also provides for costly fines if an employer demonstrates “reckless disregard” by submitting a false or fraudulent document. Penalties range from $5,000 for a first infraction to $25,000 for the second and all subsequent violations. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
The Hazleton, Pa., ordinance, which was passed last year, was designed to make the city of about 25,000 “the toughest place on illegal immigrants in America,” said its mayor, Louis J. Barletta. Sparked by what city officials characterized as a surge in crime committed by illegal immigrants, Barletta and the City Council enacted the Illegal Immigration Relief Act, which, among other things, can revoke for five years the business license of any employer who hires an illegal immigrant. The ordinance also declares that English is the city’s official language and imposes a $1,000 per-day fine on anyone who rents to an illegal immigrant. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
The ordinance was struck down late last month when Judge Munley ruled that it interfered with federal law and violated the due process rights of employers, landlords and illegal immigrants. —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
In his ruling, Munley wrote that the federal Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 “occupies the field to the exclusion of state or local laws regarding employers’ hiring, employing [or] recruiting for employment [of] unauthorized aliens.” —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
While Hazleton plans to appeal the ruling, foodservice officials nevertheless call it an important decision. “This doesn’t mean that states, cities and counties won’t try to find new ordinances to pass,” the NRA’s Gay said. “But it does establish that the federal government should be the entity that enforces immigration law.” —Concerns about this small Pennsylvania city’s law to keep out illegal immigrants have changed dramatically now that a federal court has nullified the ordinance, giving foodservice advocates ammunition to fight a nationwide rash of punitive immigration measures aimed at employers and workers by state and local lawmakers.
