Another Mandatory E-Verify Bill Introduced in the Senate

The same day a mandatory E-Verify bill was introduced in the House of Representatives, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) introduced the Accountability Through Electronic Verification Act (S. 1196) in the Senate. Like the House employment immigration bill, the Senate version would require all employers to use the E-Verify electronic employment verification system, increase employer penalties for violations of immigration law, and eliminate the current Form I-9 process. The Senate bill, however, would also require a shorter implementation timeframe for using E-Verify and expand its use, among other differences. Generally, this bill aims to accomplish the following:

  • Make the current E-Verify program permanent;
  • Require all employers to use the system within one year of the bill’s enactment;
  • Clarify that federal contractors would also be required to use E-Verify;
  • Permit employers, with consent, to use E-Verify to check the work eligibility of individuals before they are hired, recruited, or referred to the employer; Require employers to, within three years of the bill’s enactment, verify the employment eligibility of all current employees;
  • Increase employer penalties for failure to participate in E-Verify or for violating certain sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act;
  • Provide that employers using E-Verify cannot be held liable for wrongful termination charges if the employer relied in good faith on information generated through E-Verify.

In a statement, Sen. Grassley said: “E-Verify has already proven effective in combating the hiring of illegal aliens. It’s a simple tool for employers who want to comply with the law in a digital age when sophisticated, fraudulent documents are just the stroke of a computer key away,” adding: “This legislation allows us to hold employers accountable while giving them the tools needed to abide by the law in their hiring practices.”

Information contained in this publication is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or opinion, nor is it a substitute for the professional judgment of an attorney.