E-Verify, the federal program used to coordinate with employers and determine employees’ work eligibility, is undergoing another round of criticism. This follows new charges against an officer in Old Orchard Beach, Maine. Tricia McLaughlin, the then-acting Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security, condemned the town’s actions as “reckless reliance” on E-Verify. This incident has started an important discussion about how effective the program really is. We believe it has significant implications for employers nationwide.
Because E-Verify is a state program, it can be made mandatory at the state level in some states while continuing to be voluntary in others. Though it was designed for this use, as of now fewer than 1 in 5 U.S. employers use the system. Such notable companies as Walmart, Starbucks and Home Depot have taken the plunge on E-Verify, but many smaller businesses still aren’t sold. McLaughlin’s comments match up almost word-for-word with the plans of Project 2025. This blueprint, first laid out by former President Donald Trump, calls for requiring E-Verify nationwide.
Over the years, the federal government has raised serious doubts about the reliability of E-Verify. A 2021 review conducted by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) highlighted significant shortcomings within the system, concluding that it “cannot ensure the system provides accurate employment eligibility results.” This contradictory finding raises serious questions about the reliability of E-Verify. Businesses that rely on it to establish compliance with immigration law should pay attention.
In Old Orchard Beach, Maine, things escalated quickly when the town hired Jon Luke Evans. This US-born Jamaican national was subsequently incarcerated. This situation serves as a prime example of the difficulties employers encounter when trying to become compliant with immigration policies. An Omaha, Nebraska, food packaging company owner reported a raid by immigration officials despite using E-Verify for their employees, further complicating matters for businesses attempting to comply with federal requirements.
Here’s what some advocates and experts have said about the complicated issues at play with E-Verify. In a perverse way, the level of bureaucracy involved in the program may discourage the very small businesses that could benefit from it. Added Nagle, “Now their own administration is telling them, ‘Oh, no, no. That’s not enough!’ Cooney emphasized the precarious position employers find themselves in when trying to balance compliance with federal laws against potential discrimination claims. “If an employer tries to do more than what is permitted under the I-9 and E-Verify, that will very often be seen as illegal discrimination,” he explained.
Madeline Zavodny, an economics professor, echoed these sentiments, stating, “I think employers are between a rock and a hard place.” This is where the landscape becomes highly convoluted. Varying state requirements and the lack of a standard federal requirement to use E-Verify only compound the confusion.
Another supporter of E-Verify Kathleen Campbell Walker, a Texas immigration lawyer, argued in favor of the program. Second, she stated that defining it as “reckless” is detrimental to employers’ attempts to keep a safe workplace. “The whole idea is that I’m supposed to rely on E-Verify to show my good faith and to have a more secure workforce,” she stated. Walker stressed that if E-Verify is relied upon it shouldn’t be considered an irresponsible workaround.
Frank Knapp, Jr., president of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce, warned about imposing an onerous burden on employers. He asserted, “Businesses should not be in the business of being the paperwork investigator for the federal government.” This disturbing idea found a home with many business owners overwhelmed by the compliance burden imposed with the need to verify prospective immigrants’ eligibility.
As the conversations about E-Verify progress, one thing is certain, the program’s timing and effectiveness are still being questioned. The mixed responses from employers summarize a larger fear of how immigration policies can impact business practices and employee relationship management.
