A divided Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that illegal immigrants who use someone else’s information when filling out tax forms for employment can face criminal charges, despite federal laws that liberal justices claim should prohibit such cases. The Immigration Control and Reform Act (IRCA) makes it a federal crime to lie on the I-9 work authorization form, while limiting how the false information can be used. Federal law also says information “contained in” the I-9 cannot be used for law enforcement other than specified exceptions — but the Supreme Court ruled that if workers use the same information in tax documents, they can face charges. “Although IRCA expressly regulates the use of I–9’s and documents appended to that form, no provision of IRCA directly addresses the use of other documents, such as federal and state tax-withholding forms, that an employee may complete upon beginning a new job,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the court’s opinion, which was joined by fellow conservatives Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh. The IRCA also prohibits state or local charges or civil cases against “those who employ, or recruit or refer for a fee for employment, unauthorized aliens,” but Alito noted that this “makes no mention of state or local laws that impose criminal or civil sanctions on employees or applicants for employment.” In the case of Kansas v. Garcia, three immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally used someone else’s Social Security number on their I-9 forms, as well as on tax-withholding forms. They argued that state prosecutors improperly used information from their I-9 forms. The state dropped charges that relied on those forms and agreed not to use them during their trials, while claiming that the law does not prevent them from using their use of false Social Security numbers on tax documents. All three were convicted, and all three convictions were upheld by the Kansas Court of Appeals before the Kansas Supreme Court reversed the decisions. The Kansas Supreme Court ruled that charges were improper because “[t]he fact that this information was included in the W–4 and K–4 did not alter the fact that it was also part of the I–9.” Alito found this logic to be faulty, claiming that it was overly restrictive. “Taken at face value, this theory would mean that no information placed on an I–9— including an employee’s name, residence address, date of birth, telephone number, and e-mail address—could ever be used by any entity or person for any reason,” he wrote. Alito noted that the defense used a broader interpretation of the law, claiming that it preempts state or local laws “relating to the federal employment verification system.” He noted that this approach still fails because while tax-withholding forms may typically be completed at the same time as I-9 forms, they have nothing to do with employment verification and “serve entirely different functions.” Justice Stephen Breyer authored an opinion that agreed with Alito that IRCA does not “expressly” preempt state criminal laws in this case…
Even though it was walking a very fine, hyper-technical line, the majority opinion was exactly right here. So, we applaud this decision which is a clear victory for the rule of law, and for our national security with respect to the illegal alien crisis we’re experiencing. Excellent!! 🙂
Very good blog! Do you have any hints for aspiring writers?
I’m hoping to start my own blog soon but I’m a little lost on everything.
Would you propose starting with a free platform like WordPress or go
for a paid option? There are so many choices
out there that I’m totally confused .. Any recommendations?
Thanks for the kind words! We’d recommend WordPress to get ya started. We’ve been using WordPress for several years, and have upgraded the service we use through them over the years. Hope that helps! Thanks again for kind feedback. It makes what we do all the more worth it. Cheers! 🙂