Centerfield

Power to the people

As I suggested here, in my view, "[i]f you vigorously enforce the laws against employers, you cut off the source of income for illegals. They therefore have little motivation to stay. Now suppose that, in addition, you fix the problems with the immigration process, and make it possible for them to come back, as legal immigrants, permanent or otherwise: now they not only have little motivation to stay, they have active motivation to go home."

As a general matter, "it is unlawful for a person or other entity to hire . . . for employment in the United States an alien knowing the alien is an unauthorized alien . . . without complying with the [verification] requirements [of this section]." 8 U.S.C. §1324a(a)(1). A person or company can be fined a civil penalty of "not less than $250 and not more than $2,000 for each unauthorized alien" (the fine bracketts ratchet up for repeat offenders, the maximum being $3000-$10,000 per alien for "a person or entity previously subject to more than one [previous infraction]"). §1324a(e)(4)(A).

Under present law, private citizens can "rat out" companies violating this provision to the Justice Department, the Attorney General being required to establish a procedure "for individuals and entities to file written, signed complaints respecting potential violations." §1324a(e)(1)(A), but ultimately, though, it is the decision of the government to prosecute or not prosecute. Now, one of the major complaints that I see almost everywhere in this debate is some variation on the following rubric: "we don't need new laws, we just need to enforce the ones that we have." I don't have any hard evidence to say one way or another if it's true, although given the sheer numbers of illegals estimated to be present, it strains credibility to suggest that all that can be done is being done. But in any event, there is undoubtedly a perception that - for whatever reasons - the government is lax in enforcing these rules, a perception that contributes to the general tenor of the debate (and the lack of trust that Peggy Noonan talks about in her excellent WSJ article yesterday). I think I have a solution.

Down in Texas, Gov. Perry has an interesting idea (hat tip: Jason Mazzone at Concurring Opinions). Perry wants to stick "hundreds of night-vision cameras on private land along the Mexican border and put the live video on the Internet, so that anyone with a computer who spots illegal immigrants trying to slip across can report it on a toll-free hot line." Quoth Perry, ""[b]y leveraging advanced video technology and the power of the World Wide Web, and with an increased financial commitment from the state of Texas, we can make our border stronger and our nation safer." It all sounds more like CBS' Big Brother than Orwell's (although I'd suggest that a closer analog is SETI at Home); in an admirable display of the virtues of federalism, Perry is quoted as saying that "[e]nforcing the border is the federal government’s responsibility . . . But the fact of the matter is Texas will not sit around and wait." It's not perfect ("[w]hat we [really] need is more boots on the ground"), and it carries risks, but in the main, I think it's innovative and clever, not least because it gives an enforcement tool to the groups most interested in enforcement.

Which brings us back to my idea about employment violations,which is in a similar vein of putting the power into the hands of the people who are most enthusiastic about enfoorcing the law. My idea is this: create a private cause of action to allow ordinary citizens to punish violations of §1324a(a).

In other words, append to §1324a a new subsection that reads something like this:

(a) Cause of Action.-- any person aggrieved by the employment by a company of an alien, in violation of this section, may, in a civil action, recover from the person or entity which engaged in that violation, including the United States, such relief as may be appropriate.

(b) Relief.--In a civil action under this section, appropriate
relief includes--
(1) such preliminary and other equitable or declaratory relief as may be appropriate;
(2) damages under subsection (c); and
(3) a reasonable attorney's fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred.

(c) Damages.--
(1) The court may assess as damages in a civil action under this section the actual damages suffered by the plaintiff, and any profits made by the violator as a result of the violation.
(2) The court may assess punitive damages commensurate to the scale and duration of the violation, as deemed appropriate.
(3) In the case of a successful action to enforce liability under this section, the court may assess the costs of the action, together with reasonable attorney fees determined by the court.
(4) In no event will a company convicted in a civil action under this section be charged less than as provided in civil penalties under §1324a(e)(4)(A).

If the threat of being sued by thousands of aggreived persons doesn't scare companies out of employing illegals, I don't know what the heck would.

Posted by Simon at June 11, 2006 08:23 PM