Results 1 to 3 of 3
Thread: DHS Revising Its "No Match" Rule
11-28-07, 07:00 PM #1
DHS Revising Its "No Match" Rule
DHS Revising Its “No Match” Rule
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has temporarily abandoned its attempt to enforce its proposed "no match" rule that would use Social Security records for immigration enforcement. In a late Friday afternoon court filing the day after Thanksgiving in federal court in San Francisco, DHS requested that a lawsuit challenging the rule be put on hold until March 2008. The government plans to publish a revised rule next month that it believes will pass legal muster.
The lawsuit was brought by the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), and labor groups to block the proposed "no match" rule, which would require employers to penalize or fire those whose Social Security numbers don't match up with the Social Security Administration (SSA) database. The lawsuit charges that the SSA database is fundamentally flawed and error-prone, and that the rule would result in the firing of countless legal workers as well as prompt employers to discriminate against those who look or sound "foreign."
Recently, U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer issued a preliminary order stopping the government from enforcing the proposed rule - which would affect more than eight million workers - finding that it would cause irreparable harm to both innocent workers and employers.
The labor groups challenging the DHS rule say that the SSA's own Inspector General found that more than 70% of the discrepancies in the SSA database belong to native-born U.S. citizens. Discrepancies between workers' Social Security numbers and SSA records can result from a number of innocent factors including clerical errors, name changes due to marriage or divorce, or the common use of multiple surnames, they add.Don't Be Afraid To Fail.
No Tengas Miedo Al Fracaso.
11-28-07, 07:09 PM #2
SSA does not have it together whats new.
Pretty women make us BUY beer. Ugly women make us DRINK beer. --Al Bundy
12-06-07, 07:38 PM #3
DHS APPEALS "NO MATCH" RULE INJUNCTION TO NINTH CIRCUIT
DHS APPEALS “NO MATCH” RULE INJUNCTION TO NINTH CIRCUIT
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is standing behind its “no match” rule, which seeks to use Social Security records for immigration enforcement. On Tuesday, the government appealed a federal district court decision temporarily barring DHS from enforcing the rule. The issue will be decided next by the San Francisco-based Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Under the rule, employers would receive a “no match” letter from the Social Security Administration (SSA) when an employee’s name does not match the social security number the SSA has on file. Employers and employees would then have 90 days to resolve the discrepancy. A handful of labor and immigration groups led by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have challenged the rule, contending that the SSA database is full of errors and would result in the firing of countless legal workers, as well as discrimination against workers who look or sound “foreign.”
The day after Thanksgiving, DHS asked that the lawsuit be put on hold until March 2008, and announced that it would publish a revised rule in December that it believed would pass legal muster. But on Tuesday, the Justice Department appealed the injunction on behalf of DHS. In addition, DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff said yesterday, “I believe that the No-Match Rule is a major step forward in preventing employment of illegal migrants. Contrary to the ACLU’s incorrect statements, the rule is not harmful to legal workers. DHS is not abandoning it.”
Chertoff went on, “Far from abandoning the No-Match Rule, we are pressing ahead by taking the district court’s order to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. At the same time, we will soon issue a supplement to the rule that specifically addresses the three grounds on which the district court based its injunction. By pursuing these two paths simultaneously, my aim is to get a resolution as quickly as possible so we can move the No-Match Rule forward and provide honest employers with the guidance they need.”Don't Be Afraid To Fail.
No Tengas Miedo Al Fracaso.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)