Strict Penalties Imposed by ICE Upon Employers Harboring Illegal Aliens

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement Worksite Enforcement Investigations focus on those employers involved in criminal activity or worker exploitation. This type of employer violation frequently involves document fraud, human rights abuses, alien smuggling and/or harboring illegal aliens and has a direct link to the employment of unauthorized workers. In recent years, ICE has stepped up its Worksite Enforcement Investigations against unscrupulous employers who have habitually engaged in this pattern of criminal behavior leading to many arrests, convictions and deportation of undocumented workers.

In February, ICE agents executed a federal search warrant at a Los Angeles-area computer cartridge manufacturing plant, arresting current and former company workers on criminal charges and another 100 employees on immigrations violations.  In Springfield, Ill., the former owner of a local restaurant was sentenced in January to 18 months in a federal prison for harboring illegal aliens at his buffet restaurant. The sentence resulted from a criminal worksite enforcement investigation conducted by ICE.  Xian Xi Ye, 41, was sentenced in U.S. District Court to 18 months in prison for harboring illegal aliens and was also ordered to pay a $2,500 fine within one year.  Xian, an illegal alien from China, will be turned over to the ICE and subjected to deportation proceedings upon completion of his prison term.  Xian pleaded guilty in September 2007 to providing housing, employment and transportation to the illegal aliens who worked at this restaurant.

Also in January, a federal jury in Springfield, Miss., convicted a former George’s Processing Inc. employee of harboring an illegal alien and inducing an illegal alien to enter or reside in the United States.  Dora Ruiz, 33, of Monett, Miss., was found guilty of two counts contained in an Oct. 16, 2007, federal indictment.  Ruiz was found guilty of aiding and abetting others to harbor an illegal alien at George’s Processing and of aiding and abetting others to induce an illegal alien to enter or reside in the U.S. between December 2005 and May 2007.  This verdict marks the first trial conviction in an active investigation arising from the ICE worksite enforcement operation concluded at George’s Processing in May 2007. 

Yet another example of a successful ICE Worksite Enforcement initiative was the arrest in January of this year of Ji Quan Yang, 40, of Bardstown, Ky.  Yang is the president of Asian Garden Inc., According to the ICE affidavit, ICE agents observed young Hispanic and Asian workers being transported from a duplex in Bardstown to the China Star Buffet and Grill where they were employed.  He owned automobiles at the duplex.  Investigation revealed that many workers were illegal aliens who were brought to Kentucky by Yang himself.  Many of these individuals worked upwards of 80 hours per week for cash derived from dividing tips. The trial is scheduled for later this year.

There are many more ongoing ICE worksite enforcement investigations at this time which target those employers who knowingly harbor illegal aliens. Unlike in years past where such activity was not aggressively targeted by the former Immigration and Naturalization Service, ICE is committed to punishing those unscrupulous employers who deliberate refuse to comply with our nation’s strict immigration laws by hiring and harboring illegal aliens for their own monetary gain. 

Rob C. Tonogbanua, Esq.
Dickie McCamey & Chilcote, P.C.
rtonogbanua@dmclaw.com

U.S. Supreme Court Ruling on Habeus Corpus Rights for Gitmo Detainees

A major topic of debate among Constitutional rights and immigration advocates was whether so-called “terror” suspects had a right to challenge their detention in the civilian courts. Now, the U.S. Supreme Court has spoken. In a 5-4 decision, the justices handed the Bush administration yet another defeat in their quest to hold terror suspects indefinitely and without charges at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote for the majority in a 70-page opinion, stated, “We hold these petitioners do have the habeus corpus privilege.”  He further added that the Congress had failed to provide an alternative for the prisoners held at the U.S. Naval Base to contest their detention. 

In essence, the terror suspects were not afforded any real procedure to challenge their detention. Many Constitutional rights advocates hope that the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling will lead to immediate hearings for many of the detainees. Some of the detainees have been detained for as long as six years to date. It is interesting to note that under the Geneva Conventions, these individuals could have been classified as prisoners of war. As such, the Bush administration could have detained them as POWs until the conclusion of the Iraq War, which would not have been for several more years. However, because the Bush administration was adamant that these “terror” suspects be tried in military tribunals, they could not be classified as prisoners of war.

Many Constitutional rights and immigration advocates, including the detainees’ lawyers, applaud the High Court’s decision and hope that their clients now have the opportunity to secure their freedom.  Some of them felt that the Bush administration was too quick to act in detaining these individuals indefinitely, without formal charges and any real procedures for challenging their detention in light of 9/11. Obviously, the Supreme Court shares the same opinion. 

Rob C. Tonogbanua
Dickie McCamey & Chilcote, P.C.

http://www.dmclaw.com/

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement Initiatives Against Human Trafficking, Smuggling

Human trafficking is the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision or obtaining of a person for labor or services through the use of coercion, force or fraud. Human trafficking is usually for the purposes of subjecting an individual to involuntary servitude, debt bondage or slavery. Sex trafficking occurs when a commercial sex act is induced by coercion, force or fraud or when the person induced to perform these acts is under 18 years of age.

Similarly, human smuggling is the importation of people into the United States through the deliberate evasion of U.S. immigration laws. This offense includes bringing illegal aliens into the U.S. as well as unlawful transportation and harboring of such aliens already in the country illegally.
Human trafficking and human smuggling pose serious risks to homeland security.

Terrorists and criminals can often access the same routes and use the same methods used by human smugglers. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Human Smuggling and Trafficking Unit strives to identify criminals and organizations involved in these illegal activities.

In the relentless fight against human smuggling and trafficking, ICE has developed highly successful initiatives that focus on attacking the infrastructure that supports smuggling organizations as well as the assets that are derived from these criminal activities. This might include seizing currency, property, vehicles and other assets.

A new tool in ICE’s fight against human smuggling and trafficking is the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act, or CAFRA. CAFRA provides notice to property owners whose properties have been identified as being used to facilitate smuggling or harboring aliens.  This is a significant tool because many employers often turn a blind eye to the facilitation of criminal activity on their property. ICE remains thoroughly committed to preventing the smuggling and trafficking of individuals through these initiatives that adversely impact organizations engaged in these illegal practices. 

Rob C. Tonogbanua, Esq.
Dickie McCamey & Chilcote, P.C.

http://www.dmclaw.com/

False Claims of Citizenship Can Render Aliens Inadmissible

There are many aliens in the United States today, both legally and illegally, who are faced with the dilemma of supporting either themselves or their families financially, both here in the United States and back home in their country of origin. The conflict that these aliens face is determining exactly how they are planning to survive while here in the U.S. Many aliens are here on B-2 Tourist Visas.  Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, any alien present in the U.S. on a B-2 Visa is prohibited from accepting employment while visiting the U.S.

Unfortunately, despite this prohibition, there are some aliens who have secured or attempted to secure employment while only holding a B-2 Tourist Visa.  Some aliens have done this by making a false claim of U.S. citizenship to a private employer on an I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification Form.  This is a costly mistake that will not only render the alien inadmissible under this country’s immigration laws but also will forever bar this individual from ever becoming a permanent resident and ultimately a U.S. citizen. Aliens who make this mistake may be subject to immediate removal proceedings and ultimately deportation from the U.S.

Section 212(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended by the 1996 Immigration Act, renders inadmissible any alien who falsely claims to be a U.S. citizen for any purpose or benefit under the Immigration and Nationality Act or any other federal or state law. The amendments apply to false claims to U.S. citizenship on or after Sept. 30, 1996. The amendments do not apply just to citizenship claims made to obtain an immigration benefit. For instance, if a person claimed to be a U.S. citizen in order to vote in yesterday’s all-important Pennsylvania primary election, this person would be inadmissible under the statute.

In addition, it is not necessary for the claim to have been made only to a government official. A false claim of citizenship can also be made to someone in the private sector. One of the biggest mistakes that aliens have made is making a false claim of citizenship to a private sector employer on an I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification Form. If this false claim to a private employer was made on or after Sept. 30, 1996, this individual would be inadmissible.  Immigrants who are found to be inadmissible under Section 212(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the INA are permanently inadmissible.  There are absolutely no waivers available under this scenario.  Non-immigrant visa applicants may still apply for a discretionary waiver. 

If the false claim of U.S. citizenship was made prior to Sept. 30, 1996, that claim must have been made to a government official for the purposes of obtaining an immigration benefit such as a Visa or U.S. Passport. This individual would be declared inadmissible. However, waivers are still available to this individual if the claim was made to a government official to obtain an immigration benefit prior to Sept. 30, 1996. 

The bottom line is this: Making a false claim of U.S. citizenship to any person, whether a government official or private individual, is the kiss of death. Not only will you be declared inadmissible and be subject to removal or deportation proceedings but you will never have the opportunity to become a legal permanent resident and ultimately a U.S. citizen.

Rob C. Tonogbanua, Esq.
Dickie McCamey & Chilcote, P.C.

http://www.dmclaw.com/

ICE Worksite Enforcement of U.S. Immigration Laws

Under the old Immigration and Naturalization Service, there was little deterrent, if any, for U.S. employers to stop hiring illegal aliens for the purposes of employment with their companies.  The only punishment levied by the INS against employers who hired illegal aliens under this country’s prior Immigration Laws was administrative sanctions or fines. Many of those U.S. employers against whom the fines were levied did not pay them in a timely manner, had the fines reduced or simply did not pay them. As a result, there was little deterrent for these U.S. employers to discontinue their practice of hiring illegal aliens.

However, this leniency is now a thing of the past. The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was established in 2003 to combat, among other things, the hiring of illegal aliens by these U.S. employers. Now, stiff sanctions and penalties are imposed upon any U.S. employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens. For instance, the ICE is now pursuing charges against U.S. employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens. These charges include knowingly hiring illegal aliens, money laundering and harboring illegal aliens. Money laundering is a felony for which a maximum 20-year prison sentence could be imposed.  Harboring illegal aliens is also a felony with a potential 10-year prison sentence. Since criminal charges could be brought against U.S. employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens, this may be a more effective deterrent than mere monetary sanctions.

To illustrate the ICE’s determination in imposing stiffer sanctions upon employers who do not follow our country’s immigration laws, you can look no further than the increase in arrests by the ICE between 2002 and 2006. In 2002, the number of criminal arrests in worksite enforcement cases numbered 25. By 2006, this number jumped to 716. ICE investigations of workplace violations are focused upon sites whose classification, if infiltrated by unauthorized workers, could threaten national security. This would include chemical and power plants and transportation hubs.  However, the ICE also conducts vigorous investigations at more traditional places of employment. 

There have been many major ICE worksite enforcement cases over the past couple of years that have led to criminal prosecution.  Some of the companies targeted included a meat processing facility, a restaurant, a pallet services company, a housing development subcontractor and a hotel chain. In many of those cases, the owners of those companies were charged with criminal wrongdoing. Many of those companies knowingly accepted fraudulent documents produced by the illegal aliens for the purposes of securing employment. The bottom line is this: if you are a U.S. employer who typically hires foreign workers, you can be sure that the ICE will be knocking at your door in the near future if you voluntarily choose to hire illegal aliens who cannot produce authentic evidence of U.S. citizenship (i.e., birth certificate, U.S. Passport, Certificate of Naturalization) or employment authorization (i.e., Green Card or Work Authorization under a valid Non-Immigrant Visa Category). 

Rob C. Tonogbanua, Esq.
Dickie McCamey & Chilcote, P.C.

http://www.dmclaw.com