DACA and DAPA and Form I-9, Oh My! Does Prior Document Fraud Require Termination?

12 January 2015 Labor & Employment Law Perspectives Blog

President Obama’s recent decision to take executive action on immigration may cause confusion for some employers with regard to Form I-9 compliance.

The action includes two initiatives that potentially impact Form I-9 recordkeeping — enhancements to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and the creation of a similar program for parents of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents who have been in the country since January 1, 2010, to be known as the Deferred Action for Parental Accountability (DAPA).

DACA and DAPA allow individuals to apply for temporary relief from deportation if certain conditions are met. Both programs also provide eligible applicants with employment authorization.

Since DACA and DAPA are designed to benefit individuals who have been in the United States for a significant period of time, some beneficiaries may already be employed in the United States and may have presented fraudulent documents during the I-9 process.

What should an employer do when a DACA or DAPA beneficiary, or any other worker who transitions to a lawful work status from unlawful status, presents new documents to replace fraudulent documents that were originally presented during the I-9 process?

The answer may surprise you. While the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ I-9 Handbook reminds employers that workers who use fraudulent employment authorization documents are subject to fines and imprisonment, it also says that the Form I-9 rules do not require employers to terminate employees who were previously working under a false identity and who, subsequently, become work authorized, unless other laws, contractual obligations, or company policies require it.

Without an established company policy that requires termination for a false statement in the hiring process, employers should be cautious in taking action to terminate employees in this scenario.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Insights

Do You Know What IMMEX Stands For?
16 July 2019
Dashboard Insights
Does The U.S. Need STRONGER Patents?
16 July 2019
PTAB Trial Insights
California Establishes Fund to Combat Wildfire Threats
15 July 2019
Renewable Energy Outlook
There’s No Place Like Home – But Is That a Reasonable Accommodation?
15 July 2019
Labor & Employment Law Perspectives
Review of 2020 Medicare Changes for Telehealth
11 December 2019
Member Call
2019 NDI Executive Exchange
14-15 November 2019
Chicago, IL
MAGI’s Clinical Research Conference
29 October 2019
Las Vegas, NV
Association for Corporate Counsel Annual Meeting 2019
27-30 October 2019
Phoenix, AZ