Civil Rights, Immigration Policy And Workers' Rights Groups Present New Evidence On Devastating Impact Of "No Match" Rule
Evidence Submitted To Department of Homeland Security
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 519-7808 or 549-2666; media@aclu.org
WASHINGTON – The American Civil Liberties Union, Immigration Policy Center (IPC), National Immigration Law Center (NILC) and Low Wage Immigrant Worker (LWIW) Coalition presented new evidence today that confirms that if the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) proposed "no match" rule goes into effect, it will result in the mass firings of U.S. citizens and other authorized workers and have a devastating impact on American businesses and the economy.
The rule, which was republished on March 26 for public comment, would unlawfully use the error-ridden Social Security Administration (SSA) database for immigration enforcement by requiring employers to fire workers who are unable to resolve discrepancies in their Social Security records.
Today was the final day the DHS accepted comments on the rule. A broad range of organizations from civil rights to business groups have submitted comments in strong opposition to the rule, including the ACLU and the LWIW Coalition.
The LWIW Coalition's comments and a new report from the Immigration Policy Center include data from a new economic analysis commissioned by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and authored by Richard B. Belzer. Belzer, who holds a Ph.D. in Public Policy from Harvard University, is an expert in federal agency regulatory policies and practices. For ten years he served as an economist with the President's Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Belzer's analysis shows unambiguously that the proposed "no match" rule would have significant negative economic costs to employers and work-authorized immigrants.
The statements below can be attributed to the following:
Michele Waslin, Immigration Policy Center Senior Policy Analyst:
"By attempting to turn the Social Security Administration 'no match' letters into an immigration enforcement tool, DHS will not stop the flow of undocumented immigration nor substitute for meaningful immigration reform. The new rule, however, will result in U.S. citizens and lawful residents losing their jobs, will be costly for employers, and will place additional burden on an already overworked, understaffed and under-resourced Social Security Administration. More than 165,000 lawful U.S. workers could lose their jobs because of their inability to resolve discrepancies with the SSA. The cost to employers will be at least $1 billion per year. While the 'no match' program began as an effort to correct the SSA records so that workers could receive the benefits they earned, it will end up sending more workers into the underground cash economy where they will no longer contribute taxes to the SSA, and it will harm those hardworking Americans who can expect longer delays when applying for benefits."
Lucas Guttentag, ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project Director:
"Relying on the error-filled Social Security database is a recipe for disaster. The Bush administration rule will punish hardworking lawful workers, deny jobs to U.S. citizens and cause discrimination and retaliation against workers who may appear foreign or who assert their workplace rights. Rather than punishing American workers who will be the innocent victims of a fatally deficient database, the administration should abandon this rule unless it can guarantee that no American worker will lose her job.
Sarita Gupta, Jobs with Justice Executive Director, representing Low-Wage Immigrant Worker Coalition:
"This ill-conceived rule will undermine the rights of all workers and do nothing to address the reality of some seven million vulnerable workers at work in America. We have already seen that employers, to protect themselves from liability under immigration laws, incorrectly assume that workers listed in 'no match' letters are undocumented and simply fire them without giving them a chance to correct their records. Other even less scrupulous employers have used no-match letters as a tool to get more cover to hire and exploit undocumented workers, and thereby undermine all workers' rights."
A copy of the ACLU comments is available at:
www.aclu.org/immigrants/workplace/35016leg20080424.html
A copy of the LWIC comments is available at:
The executive summary of the IPC comprehensive analysis of the SSA "no match" rule is available at:
Belzer's analysis is available at:
The following includes a sampling of organizations from across the country that are on record as being opposed to the DHS proposed rule:
National and Regional Organizations
ACORNAFL-CIOAmerican Civil Liberties Union
American Friends Service Committee
Center for Community Change
Change to Win
Fair Immigration Reform Movement
Interfaith Worker Justice
Jobs with Justice
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
National Employment Law Project
National Immigration Law Center
National Korean American Service & Education Consortium (NAKASEC)
Northwest Federation of Community Organizations
Northwest Workers' Justice Project
South Asian Americans Leading Together
United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America (UE)
State and Local Organizations
California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc., CA
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation, CA
Chicago Workers' Collaborative, IL
Conexión Américas, TN
East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy, CA El CENTRO de Igualdad y Derechos, NM
El Centro, Inc, KS
Greater Boston Legal Services, MA
Hate Free Zone, WA
Idaho Community Action Network, ID
Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, IL
Korean American Resource & Cultural Center, IL
Korean Resource Center, CA
La Fuente, NY
La Raza Centro Legal, CA
Maintenance Cooperation Trust Fund, CA
Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition, MA
Nebraska Appleseed Center for Law in the Public Interest, NE
North Carolina Justice Center, NC
Oregon Action, OR
Pennsylvania Immigration and Citizenship Coalition, PA
Services, Immigrant Rights, and Education Network, CA
South Chicago Workers Center, IL
Sweatshop Watch, CA
Washington Community Action Network, WA
Working Hands Legal Clinic, IL
YKASEC - Empowering the Korean American Community, NY
Immigrants' Rights
AFL-CIO v. Chertoff
Immigrants' Rights
AFL-CIO v. Chertoff
Learn More About the Issues in This Press Release
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
Immigrants' Rights
ACLU FOIA Litigation Reveals ICE Actively Considering Proposals to Expand Immigration Detention NationwideACLU FOIA Litigation Reveals ICE Actively Considering Proposals to Expand Immigration Detention Nationwide
NEW YORK – New documents obtained by the ACLU reveal that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is actively considering proposals to expand its immigration detention capacity in at least six states across the country, including in California, Kansas, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, and Washington state. The records, obtained as a result of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed by the ACLU in September 2024, disclose that private prison corporations, as well as other corporate entities that provide services to build temporary facilities, monitor compliance, and staff facilities submitted proposals for expanded immigration detention in response to ICE’s contract requests. The discovery comes just weeks after the ACLU received its first tranche of FOIA documents revealing that ICE is considering expanding detention in three different facilities in New Jersey. “You cannot have mass deportations without a significant expansion of ICE detention capacity in states across the country and that’s exactly what the incoming Trump administration is preparing to do,” said Eunice Cho, senior staff attorney at the ACLU’s National Prison Project. “Rather than permanently shutting down abusive detention facilities, the Biden administration is paving the way for President-elect Donald Trump to make good on his cruel and inhumane mass deportation proposals.” The FOIA documents reveal that GEO Group, Inc., CoreCivic, and the Management & Training Corporation (MTC) submitted contract proposals to Requests for Information (RFI) to expand detention capacity and facilities, several of which have a lengthy history of abusive conditions. The proposals for expanded immigration detention facilities include: Midwest Regional Reception Center in Leavenworth, KS – formerly known as Leavenworth Detention Center – which has a track record of abusive conditions, which led the federal government to end its contract with the facility in 2021. South Texas Family Residential Center in Dilley, TX – a facility where children as young as 19 months have died as a result poor medical care. Nevada Southern Detention Center in Pahrump, NV – which has been subject to a federal invesitgation for medical negligence, racial discrimination, and verbal abuse of detained people. Cibola County Correctional Center in Milan, NM — which has been the site of numerous deaths in recent years, with incidents of neglect, abuse, and lack of medical care. Torrance County Detention Facility in Estancia, NM – which Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General cited in 2022 due to poor conditions. California City Correctional Center in California City, CA – which was previously used as a California Department of Corrections prison until March 2024. ICE also withheld a number of documents in its FOIA disclosure, obscuring the names of the specific facilities. However, the documents produced indicate that the following detention facilities are likely under consideration by ICE: Lea County Correctional Facility in Hobbs, NM (Proposal by GEO Group, Inc. for the El Paso Field Office) Northwest ICE Processing Center in Tacoma, WA (Proposal by GEO Group, Inc. for the Seattle Field Office) Golden State Annex in McFarland, CA (Proposal by GEO Group, Inc. for the San Francisco Field Office) Mesa Verde Detention Center in Bakersfield, CA (Proposal by GEO Group, Inc. for the San Francisco Field Office) MTC facility in South Texas, which may include the Willacy County Jail in Raymondville, TX (Proposal by MTC for the Harlingen Field Office) GEO Group, Inc. facility in IL, IN, WI, MI, KT, or KS (Proposal by GEO Group, Inc. for Chicago Field Office) GEO Group, Inc. facility in South Texas, which may include the Brooks County Detention Center, Falfurrias, TX; Coastal Bend Detention Center, Robstown, TX; or the East Hidalgo Detention Center in LaVilla, TX (Proposal by GEO Group, Inc. For the Harlingen Field Office) Other corporate entities, including Kastel Enterprises, LLC., and Active Deployment Systems, which provide services to build temporary facilities, and Sabot Consulting, which provides compliance monitoring and detention staffing services, also submitted responses to ICE’s request. As the ACLU has previously documented, the federal government’s immigration detention system overwhelmingly relies on private prison corporations. Private prison corporations, like the GEO Group, CoreCivic, LaSalle Corrections, and the Management & Training Corporation have pocketed billions from ICE detention contracts over the past two decades. The FOIA records are available here: /documents/multi-state-detention-facility-support-foia-documents-request-for-information -
News & CommentaryDec 2024
Immigrants' Rights
Trump’s Remarks on Birthright Citizenship, ExplainedTrump’s Remarks on Birthright Citizenship, Explained
The president-elect has said he intends to end birthright citizenship. We break down why that’s clearly unconstitutional. -
Press ReleaseDec 2024
National Security
Immigrants' Rights
Federal Judge Rejects Acquitted Man’s Argument That His Immigration Detention Is UnlawfulFederal Judge Rejects Acquitted Man’s Argument That His Immigration Detention Is Unlawful
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — This week, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ruled that the court does not have jurisdiction to decide whether the government can continue to detain Nizar Trabelsi, a Tunisian national who was brought to the United States against his will for prosecution and was cleared of all charges last year. The ruling means the United States will be able to continue to detain Mr. Trabelsi while it attempts to deport him to Tunisia, where he was born and where, as an immigration judge ruled earlier this year, he will likely face torture. The court also concluded that even if it did have jurisdiction over Mr. Trabelsi’s case, his claims challenging the government’s detention of him would fail. “Reviewing claims that the government is holding someone unlawfully is at the core of the judicial function, and we’re heartbroken for our client that the court got this so wrong,” said Brett Max Kaufman, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Center for Democracy. “The government’s arguments in defense of Mr. Trabelsi’s detention makes a hash of the Constitution, immigration laws, and its own extradition treaty.” In 2013, the United States forcibly extradited Mr. Trabelsi from Belgium to face criminal charges in the United States. In July 2023, after almost 10 years of highly restrictive pretrial detention, a federal jury cleared Mr. Trabelsi of all charges. But instead of releasing Mr. Trabelsi or returning him to Belgium, the U.S. transferred him to immigration detention, wrongly treating him as an applicant for admission and placing him in the deportation process. Over the years, the Belgian government has issued multiple formal diplomatic requests asking the U.S. to facilitate his return, but the U.S. has refused to send him back. Mr. Trabelsi filed a lawsuit challenging the government's authority to detain him. He also sought immediate improvements to his detention conditions. Those claims were not part of the court’s ruling today, and will continue to be litigated on a separate track. “Mr. Trabelsi only wants to return to Belgium after being illegally extradited to the United States, held for ten years, and then acquitted by a jury of any crimes,” said Nicole Hallett, clinical professor of law and director of the Immigrants’ Rights Clinic at the University of Chicago Law School. “He cannot be held indefinitely and we will continue to fight to make sure that justice ultimately prevails.” Mr. Trabelsi is represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the University of Chicago Law School’s Immigrants’ Rights Clinic, the ACLU of Virginia, and Professor Jonathan Hafetz of Seton Hall Law School. The complaint in Trabelsi v. Crawford was filed against Jeffrey Crawford, warden of the Farmville Detention Center where Mr. Trabelsi is being held; Liana Castano, ICE field office director for the Washington Field Office; Alejandro Mayorkas, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security; and Merrick Garland, U.S. attorney general. -
Press ReleaseNov 2024
Immigrants' Rights
ACLU FOIA Litigation Reveals New Information Regarding ICE’s Plans to Expand Immigration Detention in New JerseyACLU FOIA Litigation Reveals New Information Regarding ICE’s Plans to Expand Immigration Detention in New Jersey
NEW YORK – New documents obtained by the ACLU reveal that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is actively considering proposals to expand its immigration detention capacity across the state of New Jersey. The records, obtained as a result of a FOIA lawsuit filed by the ACLU in September 2024, disclose that ICE capacity could increase by approximately 600 beds in at least two facilities in New Jersey. The discovery comes as President-elect Donald Trump continues to double down on his campaign promise to implement the largest mass deportation and detention program in the nation’s history. For months, the ACLU of New Jersey and advocates have raised concerns with the Biden administration’s plans to expand detention in New Jersey, as well as in potentially sixteen other states identified by ICE. “Instead of closing abusive detention facilities once and for all, the Biden administration is simply paving the way for the incoming Trump administration to conduct mass detention and deportation of immigrant communities nationwide,” said Eunice Cho, Senior Staff Attorney at the ACLU’s National Prison Project. “The Biden administration must instead work to close these facilities now.” These facilities under consideration include the Elizabeth Detention Center, located in Elizabeth, New Jersey and owned and operated by CoreCivic, Inc., and the Albert M. “Bo” Robinson Center (ARC) in Trenton, New Jersey, which was formerly owned by the GEO Group, Inc. Both facilities have significant records of poor conditions. Investigations of conditions at ARC exposed abusive conditions including “robbery, sexual assault, [and] menacing of the weak.” Meanwhile, the Elizabeth Detention Center has also come under fire for consistent medical neglect, cramped and unsanitary living quarters, and abusive treatment from guards. The ACLU obtained these documents as a result of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation, which sought in part records responsive to a contract solicitation for additional ICE detention space in the Newark, New Jersey area. The solicitation, originally issued on June 26, 2024, sought “comprehensive detention services for adult male and female noncitizens” to “provide for general population, intake, segregated housing, and medical beds at a contractor-owned/contractor-operated detention facility or facilities.” The documents provided by ICE provide a limited glimpse of the detention proposals, as the production appears to include only the environmental impact statement portions of the proposals submitted by CoreCivic, Inc. and GEO Group, Inc. to ICE. It is unclear from the documents whether there are additional New Jersey facilities that responded to ICE’s solicitation, or how much it would cost taxpayers. For example, the GEO Group, Inc. claimed in litigation earlier this year that it has readied the Delaney Hall Facility, located in Newark, New Jersey, to conform with ICE operating requirements. “New Jersey has already taken steps to oppose immigrant detention by phasing out ICE contracts and closing county-run ICE jails. But as federal plans to expand detention in New Jersey continue, the need for protections grows by the day. That’s why it’s imperative that the Biden administration immediately halt any efforts to expand this abusive detention machine,” said ACLU-NJ campaign strategist Ami Kachalia. “We also urge the New Jersey Legislature to quickly pass the Immigrant Trust Act so that New Jersey is not complicit in separating families or depriving our residents of due process.” State officials and members of New Jersey’s congressional delegation have opposed the expansion of ICE detention in the state. Earlier this year, eight Representatives and Senator Cory Booker raised concern regarding the development of additional private ICE detention facilities in the state. Prior to that, the New Jersey state legislature passed AB 5207 in 2021, which prohibited state and local entities and private detention facilities from entering, renewing, or expanding immigration detention contracts. Both CoreCivic, Inc., and GEO Group, Inc. filed suit to stop enforcement of the law, which has been enjoined pending appeal. The ACLU of New Jersey filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of 28 community organizations in support of New Jersey's anti-detention law. The FOIA records are available here: /documents/foia-documents-re-nj-ice-detention-rfi