I-688, I-688A, I-688B, I-766
Instructions
regarding
Section
1
of
Form
I-9
now
indicate
that
the
employee
is
not
obliged
to
provide
the
Social
Security
Number
in
Section
1
of
Form
I-9,
unless
he
or
she
is
employed
by
an
employer
who
participates
in
E-Verify.
(Of
course,
other
laws
may
require
collection
of
the
Social
Security
number
in
the
hiring
process.)
The
instructions
section
on
photocopying
and
retaining
Form
I-9
now
includes
information
about
electronically
signing
and
retaining
I-9
forms.
I-9's
format,
font,
organization
and
grammar
have
changed
slightly,
but
the
manner
in
which
the
form
is
completed
has
not
changed.
Previously
completed
I-9
forms
should
not
be
re-done
with
the
new
form.
If,
however,
an
employer
needs
to
re-verify
an
existing
employee
whose
I-9
was
completed
on
the
old
version
and
whose
work
authorizing
document
has
now
expired,
the
new
version
of
Form
I-9
must
be
used,
thus
completing
a
new
form
altogether,
rather
than
using
the
bottom
portion
of
the
old
version.
DHS
has
also
published
a
new
Handbook
for
Employers,
Form
M-274,
which
had
not
been
updated
since
1991.
The
new
handbook
contains
clearer
explanations
of
employers'
obligations
and
updated
examples
of
acceptable
documents.
Unfortunately,
the
handbook
fails
to
show
all
the
different
variations
of
the
shown
document
types
that
can
be
valid,
fails
to
explain
sufficiently
that
other
versions
might
be
valid,
fails
to
depict
several
types
of
acceptable
documents
at
all,
and
depicts
some
types
of
documents
incorrectly.
Thus,
employers
continue
to
lack
clear
governmental
guidance
in
their
role
as
involuntary
document
reviewers.
DHS
had
been
planning
to
re-vamp
the
Form
I-9
more
completely
through
a
comprehensive
rulemaking
and
delayed
the
effort
in
part
from
anticipation
of
comprehensive
legislation
that
might
have
required
even
more
changes.
DHS
has
decided
to
publish
the
just-announced
version
with
only
the
above
changes
as
part
of
its
publicized
effort
to
pursue
all
available
measures
to
enforce
existing
immigration
laws
in
the
employment
context.
The
new
form
and
information
can
be
found
on
the
Internet
at
the
following
locations:
DHS
recently
published
a
regulation
that
announced
an
intention
to
hold
employers
accountable
for
"constructive
knowledge"
of
their
employment
of
unauthorized
aliens,
including
admissions
from
alien
workers
themselves,
requests
by
workers
for
immigration
sponsorship,
no-match
letters
from
the
Social
Security
Administration
and
notifications
from
DHS.
DHS
and
SSA
announced
that
this
Fall's
round
of
no-match
letters
would
contain
also
a
letter
from
DHS
warning
the
employer
not
to
ignore
the
no-match
finding.
The
regulation
and
the
DHS
letter
set
forth
specific
steps
for
an
employer
to
take
in
response
to
the
SSA
no-match
letter
that
would
provide
a
safe
harbor
for
the
employer
from
DHS
administrative
sanctions.
A
federal
court
has
since
enjoined
the
regulation
and
the
DHS
insert
for
no-match
letters,
but
DHS
is
expected
to
take
an
aggressive
stand
concerning
constructive
knowledge
in
prosecutions
of
employers
and
their
managers
that
are
ongoing
all
over
the
United
States.
Meanwhile,
numerous
states
have
enacted
laws
that
require
employers
in
different
situations
to
participate
in
otherwise
voluntary
federal
verification
programs
and
certify
their
avoidance
of
unauthorized
workers
under
penalty
of
lost
state
contracts,
lost
business
licenses
and
other
lawsuits
and
enforcement
actions.
The
pattern
of
regulation
concerning
immigration
compliance
has
become
increasingly
complex
with
high
stakes.
