Immigration Legal Help

Chamber of Commerce v. Edmondson, 594 F.3d 742 (2010)

Federal law requires verification for employees but not for independent contractors; a state withholding rule for contractors was preempted.

Cited on: Utah, Arizona and Nevada: Immigration Compliance Differences for Crews Crossing State Lines · 1099 Contractor or Misclassified Employee: Where I-9 Duties Begin · A General Contractor's Liability When a Subcontractor Uses Unauthorized Workers

Donovan v. A.A. Beiro Construction Co., 746 F.2d 894 (1984)

On shared sites, the owner and other contractors can consent to common areas, so roles should be agreed with the GC in advance.

Cited on: Three Immigration Compliance Priorities for Construction Employers This Quarter · ICE at the Jobsite: What Supervisors Should Do and Say in the First Minutes · Public and Private Areas, Shared Jobsites, and Warrants Aimed at One Subcontractor

Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177 (1990)

Why the 'I am not authorized to consent' script matters: consent from someone who appears to have authority can validate an entry.

Cited on: Three Immigration Compliance Priorities for Construction Employers This Quarter · Who Has Authority to Speak for the Company When ICE Arrives? · ICE at the Jobsite: What Supervisors Should Do and Say in the First Minutes

Outdoor Amusement Business Ass'n v. DHS, 983 F.3d 671 (2020)

Upheld the current joint H-2B rules the compliance duties come from.

Cited on: H-2B Compliance After Workers Arrive and the Mistakes That Trigger Debarment · What an H-2B Worker Costs and the U.S.-Worker Recruitment Steps Before Filing · Does Roofing Qualify for H-2B? Proving Temporary Need in a Year-Round Market

Santillan Quiroz v. Mullin, 180 F.4th 1226 (2026)

Interior arrestees who entered without inspection are entitled to a bond hearing in the Tenth Circuit.

Cited on: Three Immigration Compliance Priorities for Construction Employers This Quarter · Legal Defense, Bond and Referral Resources for Detained Workers in Utah · When a Worker Is Detained by ICE in Utah: Finding Them, Transfers and Bond

Split Rail Fence Co. v. United States, 852 F.3d 1228 (2017)

Failing to re-verify workers after ICE's suspect-document notices supported constructive knowledge.

Cited on: A General Contractor's Liability When a Subcontractor Uses Unauthorized Workers · The Most Common Immigration Compliance Mistake Construction Employers Make · What an ICE I-9 Audit Looks Like From Notice of Inspection to Resolution

Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012)

State officers may not arrest someone solely on suspected removability absent federal direction.

Cited on: Washington County Sheriff, 287(g) and ICE Detainers: What Changes on a Jobsite · What Documents Should Immigrant Workers Carry, and What Should They Never Carry?

Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting, 563 U.S. 582 (2011)

Upheld Arizona's license-sanction law and E-Verify mandate.

Cited on: Utah, Arizona and Nevada: Immigration Compliance Differences for Crews Crossing State Lines · Utah's E-Verify Rule, Its 2027 Sunset, and State Penalties Beyond I-9 Fines

Collins Foods International v. INS, 948 F.2d 549 (1991)

Constructive knowledge must be sparingly applied; an employer is not expected to be a document expert.

Cited on: A General Contractor's Liability When a Subcontractor Uses Unauthorized Workers · The Most Common Immigration Compliance Mistake Construction Employers Make

INS v. Delgado, 466 U.S. 210 (1984)

Upheld workplace questioning by immigration agents, but only where workers had no reason to believe they would be detained for refusing to answer.

Cited on: What Are Workers' Rights When ICE Approaches, and How Should They Invoke Them? · ICE at the Jobsite: What Supervisors Should Do and Say in the First Minutes

Ketchikan Drywall Services, Inc. v. ICE, 725 F.3d 1103 (2013)

An employer that hired workers with incomplete Section 1 forms did so at its own peril; copies of documents do not substitute for a completed form.

Cited on: Internal I-9 Audits: Correcting Errors Safely and Whether a Proactive Audit Is Worth It · What an ICE I-9 Audit Looks Like From Notice of Inspection to Resolution

Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204 (1981)

An arrest warrant does not authorize a search of a third party's premises.

Cited on: Judicial Warrant or ICE Administrative Warrant: What Should a Supervisor Check? · Public and Private Areas, Shared Jobsites, and Warrants Aimed at One Subcontractor

United States v. Hansen, 599 U.S. 762 (2023)

'Encourages or induces' in 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) means criminal solicitation or facilitation of a specific unlawful act.

Cited on: Supporting Detained Employees Without Crossing Into Harboring · Can Employers Share Know-Your-Rights Information and Cards Without Practicing Law?

United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (1974)

Common authority over premises, not title alone, determines who can consent.

Cited on: Who Has Authority to Speak for the Company When ICE Arrives? · ICE at the Jobsite: What Supervisors Should Do and Say in the First Minutes

Aguilar v. ICE, 510 F.3d 1 (2007)

After a workplace raid, rapid transfers out of state were upheld against challenges brought in district court.

Cited on: When a Worker Is Detained by ICE in Utah: Finding Them, Transfers and Bond

Alejandra Gallegos v. Merrick B. Garland, 25 F.4th 1087 (2022) — Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Finding no exceptional circumstances justifying Gallegos’s failure to appear at her removal proceedings, we conclude the Board did not abuse its discretion and deny Gallegos’s petition for review.

Cited on: Domestic Air Travel While Your Asylum Case Is Pending

Bd. of Comm'rs, Utah State Bar v. Petersen, 937 P.2d 1263 (Utah 1997)

Defines the practice of law as counseling, advising and assisting others about their legal rights, duties and liabilities.

Cited on: Can Employers Share Know-Your-Rights Information and Cards Without Practicing Law?

Blackie's House of Beef, Inc. v. Castillo, 659 F.2d 1211 (1981)

After the owner refused consent, INS obtained a warrant to search the business; a business-search warrant need not name each worker if it is specific as to place, time and scope.

Cited on: Public and Private Areas, Shared Jobsites, and Warrants Aimed at One Subcontractor

Boluk v. Holder, 642 F.3d 297 (2011) — Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

We conclude that the allocation of the burden of proof was proper, that the agency articulated the proper legal standard for demonstrating a good faith marriage, and that the agency properly determined that Boluk was ineligible for the relief he sought.

Cited on: Removing Conditions on a Marriage-Based Green Card After Divorce

Committee of Central American Refugees v. INS, 795 F.2d 1434 (1986)

Transfers of detainees to remote facilities do not by themselves violate due process or the right to counsel.

Cited on: When a Worker Is Detained by ICE in Utah: Finding Them, Transfers and Bond

Delrio-Mocci v. Connolly Properties, Inc., 672 F.3d 241 (2012)

Harboring requires conduct that facilitates remaining unlawfully and prevents detection; ordinary dealings are not enough.

Cited on: Supporting Detained Employees Without Crossing Into Harboring

Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (1991)

A refusal to cooperate, without more, does not furnish the justification needed for a detention.

Cited on: What Are Workers' Rights When ICE Approaches, and How Should They Invoke Them?

Galarza v. Szalczyk, 745 F.3d 634 (2014)

ICE detainers are requests, not commands, and a county that honors one answers for the detention.

Cited on: Washington County Sheriff, 287(g) and ICE Detainers: What Changes on a Jobsite

Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court, 542 U.S. 177 (2004)

A state may require a name during a lawful stop; the statute did not require any document.

Cited on: What Are Workers' Rights When ICE Approaches, and How Should They Invoke Them?

Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. NLRB, 535 U.S. 137 (2002)

Limits labor-board backpay for work not performed; it does not reach wages already earned.

Cited on: A Detained Employee's Job, Final Wages, PTO and Benefits in Utah, Arizona and Nevada

INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U.S. 1032 (1984)

Civil removal proceedings differ from criminal cases; the Court noted that silence may support an adverse inference there.

Cited on: What Are Workers' Rights When ICE Approaches, and How Should They Invoke Them?

Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000)

Unprovoked flight can supply reasonable suspicion; running is not a mere refusal to cooperate.

Cited on: What Are Workers' Rights When ICE Approaches, and How Should They Invoke Them?

Jose Gutierrez-Gutierrez v. Merrick B. Garland, 991 F.3d 990 (2021) — Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Gutierrez’s reentry was unlawful because he reentered within ten years of his removal without the Attorney General’s permission to reapply for admission.

Cited on: Returning to the U.S. Years After a Prior Deportation

LEMUS, 24 I. — Board of Immigration Appeals

An alien who is unlawfully present in the United States for a period of 1 year, departs the country, and then seeks admission within 10 years of the date of his departure from the United States, is inadmissible under section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (a)(2)(B)(i)(II) (2000), even if the alien’s departure was not made pursuant to an order of removal and was not a voluntary departure in lieu of being subject to removal proceedings or at the conclusion of removal proceedings.

Cited on: Bringing a Spouse Back to the U.S. After Self-Deportation to Guatemala

Lamonica v. Safe Hurricane Shutters, Inc., 711 F.3d 1299 (2013)

Undocumented construction workers may recover unpaid FLSA wages; Hoffman Plastic does not bar the claim.

Cited on: A Detained Employee's Job, Final Wages, PTO and Benefits in Utah, Arizona and Nevada

Lanier v. Industrial Comm'n, 694 P.2d 625 (Utah 1985)

A written attendance policy shaped whether a no-call absence counted as a voluntary quit for unemployment purposes.

Cited on: A Detained Employee's Job, Final Wages, PTO and Benefits in Utah, Arizona and Nevada

Lucas v. Jerusalem Cafe, LLC, 721 F.3d 927 (2013)

Unauthorized workers may sue under the FLSA to recover wages for work actually performed.

Cited on: A Detained Employee's Job, Final Wages, PTO and Benefits in Utah, Arizona and Nevada

Mancusi v. DeForte, 392 U.S. 364 (1968)

A person has standing to object to a search of their own office, supporting a sub's interest in its exclusive space.

Cited on: Public and Private Areas, Shared Jobsites, and Warrants Aimed at One Subcontractor

Maryland v. Macon, 472 U.S. 463 (1985)

Entering areas of a business open to the public is not a search.

Cited on: Public and Private Areas, Shared Jobsites, and Warrants Aimed at One Subcontractor

Matter of Yajure Hurtado, 29 I&N Dec. 216 (2025)

The agency's contrary position that such noncitizens are subject to mandatory detention; rejected by the Tenth Circuit.

Cited on: When a Worker Is Detained by ICE in Utah: Finding Them, Transfers and Bond

Mester Manufacturing Co. v. INS, 879 F.2d 561 (1989)

An employer told its workers' documents were suspect, which made no inquiry and kept them, had constructive knowledge.

Cited on: A General Contractor's Liability When a Subcontractor Uses Unauthorized Workers

Morales v. Chadbourne, 793 F.3d 208 (2015)

Holding a person on a detainer after release is due is a new seizure that needs its own probable cause.

Cited on: Washington County Sheriff, 287(g) and ICE Detainers: What Changes on a Jobsite

New El Rey Sausage Co. v. INS, 925 F.2d 1153 (1991)

Notice that documents are bad puts the employer where it would be had no documents been produced.

Cited on: A General Contractor's Liability When a Subcontractor Uses Unauthorized Workers

Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170 (1984)

Fences and 'No Trespassing' signs do not create Fourth Amendment protection in open fields.

Cited on: Public and Private Areas, Shared Jobsites, and Warrants Aimed at One Subcontractor

Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980)

Absent exigency, officers may not cross the threshold of a home without a warrant; a judicial arrest warrant allows entry only into the subject's own dwelling.

Cited on: Judicial Warrant or ICE Administrative Warrant: What Should a Supervisor Check?

Reyes v. Waples Mobile Home Park L.P., 91 F.4th 270 (2024)

The harboring statute reaches those who intend to help someone hide from the authorities and involves an element of deceit.

Cited on: Supporting Detained Employees Without Crossing Into Harboring

Sanchez v. Mayorkas, 593 U.S. 409 (2021)

A grant of status is not an admission; a worker who entered without inspection cannot use the lawful-admission route to adjust.

Cited on: Can Employers Get Work Visas for Immigrant Workers Who Are Already Here?

Santos v. Frederick County Bd. of Comm'rs, 725 F.3d 451 (2013)

Local officers may not arrest solely for a suspected civil immigration violation.

Cited on: Washington County Sheriff, 287(g) and ICE Detainers: What Changes on a Jobsite

Sedighi v. Schnackel Engineers, 317 Neb. 890 (2024)

An employer that shifted its PERM attorney fee to the worker had to repay it; the court applied 20 C.F.R. § 656.12(b).

Cited on: How Can an Employer Help an Employee Through the Immigration Process?

See v. City of Seattle, 387 U.S. 541 (1967)

Nonconsensual administrative entry into non-public commercial premises requires a warrant procedure.

Cited on: Public and Private Areas, Shared Jobsites, and Warrants Aimed at One Subcontractor

Seven Star, Inc. v. United States, 873 F.2d 225 (1989)

Temporariness depends on the nature of the need and cannot be manufactured by the employer.

Cited on: Does Roofing Qualify for H-2B? Proving Temporary Need in a Year-Round Market

Trump v. Barbara, 609 U.S. ___ (2026) (No. 25-365

The Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause guarantees citizenship at birth to children born on U.S. soil to parents who are unlawfully or only temporarily present — such children are 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the United States — and the Supreme Court affirmed the district court's classwide preliminary injunction barring enforcement of Executive Order No. 14160, which had sought to deny them citizenship.

Cited on: Do You Qualify for U.S. Citizenship Through Birthright?

United States v. Alas, 63 F.4th 269 (2023)

A 287(g) delegation is officer-by-officer; uncertified deputies cannot enforce federal immigration law.

Cited on: Washington County Sheriff, 287(g) and ICE Detainers: What Changes on a Jobsite

United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 (1975)

Apparent Mexican ancestry alone does not justify a stop to question someone about immigration status.

Cited on: What Are Workers' Rights When ICE Approaches, and How Should They Invoke Them?

United States v. Costello, 666 F.3d 1040 (2012)

Providing a place to stay, without more, is not harboring.

Cited on: Supporting Detained Employees Without Crossing Into Harboring