The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a press release rescinding the No-Match Regulations issued in 2007. DHS indicated that it would be proposing a new regulation rescinding the 2007 No-Match Rule, which was blocked by court order shortly after issuance and has never taken effect.

Collective bargaining agreements continue to be the best protection for workers threatened with adverse employment actions due to social security number mismatch or “no-match” discrepancies.

A Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request regarding immigration enforcement audits of California workplaces by the federal government was filed today by The ACLU of California (ACLU), the Glass, Molders, Pottery, Plastics & Allied Workers International Union, The Glass, Molders, Pottery, Plastics & Allied Workers International Union Local 164B, the Service Employees International Union United Service Workers West (“USWW”), and the San Francisco Bay Guardian.

On September 8, 2011, two local unions and one international union (the Glass, Molders, Pottery, Plastics & Allied Workers International Union Local 164B, the Service Employees International Union United Service Workers West (“USWW”), the Glass, Molders, Pottery, Plastics & Allied Workers International Union) along with the ACLU-NC and a newspaper outlet submitted a request for information to the federal government seeking records pertaining to workplace immigration enforcement operations including -9 audits.

El 31 de marzo de 2011, el Departamento de Labor (DOL) y el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS) firmaron un nuevo Memorando de Entendimiento (MOU) con respecto a la ejecución de las leyes de inmigración en los lugares de trabajo durante conflictos laborales.

A new report, “Visas, Inc.: Corporate Control and Policy Incoherence in the U.S. Temporary Foreign Labor System,” from the Global Workers Justice Alliance, provides an analysis of the many visas that employers use and misuse to bring workers into the U.S. from abroad.

On June 25, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling in Arizona v. United States. The Court was charged with deciding whether four provisions of Arizona’s omnibus immigration law – SB 1070 – are preempted by federal law.