Kansas v. Garcia


(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2019 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus KANSAS v. GARCIA CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS No. 17–834. Argued October 16, 2019—Decided March 3, 2020* The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) makes it un- lawful to hire an alien knowing that he or she is unauthorized to work in the United States. 8 U. S. C. §§1324a(a)(1), (h)(3). IRCA requires employers to comply with a federal employment verification system. §1324a(b). Using a federal work-authorization form (I–9), they “must attest” that they have “verified” that any new employee, regardless of citizenship or nationality, “is not an unauthorized alien” by examining approved documents, e.g., a United States passport or an alien regis- tration card, §1324a(b)(1)(A). IRCA concomitantly requires all em- ployees to complete an I–9 by their first day of employment and to at- test that they are authorized to work. §1324a(b)(2). Every employee must also provide certain personal information, including name, ad- dress, birth date, Social Security number, e-mail address, and tele- phone number. It is a federal crime for an employee to provide false information on an I–9 or to use fraudulent documents to show work authorization. See 18 U. S. C. §§1028, 1546. But it is not a federal crime for an alien to work without authorization, and state laws crim- inalizing such conduct are preempted. Arizona v. United States, 567 U. S. 387, 403–407. The I–9 forms and appended documentation, as well as the employment verification system, may only be used for en- forcement of the Immigration and Nationality Act or other specified federal prohibitions. See §§1324a(b)(5), (d)(2)(F). IRCA does not di- rectly address the use of an employee’s federal and state tax-withhold- ing forms, the W–4 and K–4 respectively. Finally, IRCA expressly “preempt[s] any State or local law imposing civil or criminal sanctions —————— * Together with Kansas v. Morales (see this Court’s Rule 12.4) and Kansas v. Ochoa-Lara (see this Court’s Rule 12.4), also on certiorari to the same court. 2 KANSAS v. GARCIA Syllabus . . . upon those who employ, or recruit or refer for a fee for employment, unauthorized aliens.” §1324a(h)(2). Kansas makes it a crime to commit “identity theft” or engage in fraud to obtain a benefit. Respondents, three unauthorized aliens, were tried for fraudulently using another person’s Social Security number on the W–4’s and K–4’s that they submitted upon obtaining employment. They had used the same Social Security numbers on their I–9 forms. Respondents were convicted, and the Kansas Court of Appeals affirmed. A divided Kansas Supreme Court reversed, conclud- ing that §1324a(b)(5) ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals