N E W S R E L E A S E

FOR RELEASE: immediate; May 6, 2008

CONTACT: Edith Hakola, Esq. Executive Vice President

Arizona Law Deters Illegal Immigration

Public Policy Law Group Files Amicus Brief Supporting Arizona’s Employment Verification System

WARRENTON, VA ... The American Unity Legal Defense Fund (AULDF) has sided with the State of Arizona in support of its new requirement that employers corroborate workers’ employment eligibility via the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) internet-based Basic Pilot/E-Verify program. The DHS measure is designed to verify the employment eligibility of all newly hired workers. Arizona is the first state to enact its own verification law to restrict the hiring of illegal aliens.

Arizona created state penalties for employers who “knowingly” or “intentionally” employ illegal aliens, including the possible suspension or revocation of business licenses. AULDF defends “The Legal Arizona Workers Act” because, according to their Brief,

Federal immigration law enforcement in the workplace has collapsed in the last decade. Some blame document fraud for the problem, but the collapse has deeper roots. Despite federal officials’ public statements about the need to punish employers, the actual number of workplace arrests and fines declined by more than 99% between Fiscal Years 1996 and 2005 ...

The Arizona law has been challenged by a coalition of business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, who claim Congress sought to "balance" business efficiency in its penalties for employers of illegal immigrants. Arizona disputes the extent of this ‘balance” in an area where Congress expressly permitted state ‘licensing and similar’ regulation of employers of illegal immigrants.

AULDF’s Amicus Brief goes on to argue that:

Congress sought to protect American workers and the immigrants themselves from the evils associated with illegal immigration. It would be odd to say that individuals have a private right to punish employers of illegal immigrant workers, but that states cannot pass ‘licensing or similar’ statutes to do the same thing. It would be similarly odd to say, as Appellants and their amici do, that the Section 1324a system is intended to provide an exclusive federal administrative process for penalizing those who hire illegal immigrants, when RICO remedies can be brought by private citizens in state courts.

Moreover, says AULDF, the business groups’ assertions that they do not “support the knowing hiring of illegal immigrants” is disingenuous at best, and that these groups actually view these illegal immigrants as “essential workers.” Employers are well aware of the lack of effective enforcement, and take advantage of the rules to continue hiring low-cost illegal labor at the expense of American workers.

Edith Hakola, Executive Vice President of the American Unity Legal Defense Fund, observed:

“According to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 4,900 workplace arrests of illegal immigrants in 2007, out of a population estimated at greater than ten million aliens, is less than 30% of the 17,554 workplace arrests made ten years ago. If Washington cannot or will not enforce the law, then we stand by the courageous initiatives such as Arizona’s to protect American jobs.”

Mrs. Hakola, a Virginia attorney and former Reagan appointee to the ten-member council of the Administrative Conference of the United States, stated:

“a growing minority of employers actually prefer to hire illegal immigrants to cut costs in shameless violation of explicit federal — and now state laws — to the contrary. This practice encourages poor working conditions and results in lowering wages for American workers.”

She also pointed out that, Groups such as the Associated Builders and Contractors and even the U.S. chamber of Commerce have allied themselves with such groups as the ACLU and the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund: that’s not good for their traditional ‘business’ of representing the overwhelming number of honest and even struggling American employers who obey the law.

The American Unity Legal Defense Fund is an independent, national, non-profit educational organization dedicated to preserving America’s historical unity by addressing important public policy issues including genuine immigration reform.

Click Here to download complete brief in PDF format

N E W S R E L E A S E

FOR RELEASE: April 28, 2008

Indiana Voter I.D. Decision Will Impact Illegal Alien Voter Fraud

Public Policy Law Group Says Supreme Court Ruling Bolsters Immigration Reform Efforts

(WARRENTON, VA) The 6-3 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Crawford vs. Marion County Elections Board case will have an impact well beyond the November elections says a national public policy organization. Edith Hakola, Executive Vice President of the American Unity Legal Defense Fund (AULDF)-which filed an amicus brief in the case-observed: "When the Court upheld Indiana's effort to protect voters by requiring photo identification at the polls, it sent a strong signal to non-citizens who attempt to cast ballots illegally."

Yesterday, the Court ruled that the State of Indiana has a valid "interest in deterring and detecting voter fraud" as well as an interest in protecting "public confidence in the integrity of the electoral process . . . because it encourages citizen participation in the democratic process."

Opponents to the Indiana law-including the NAACP, the ACLU, the Indiana Democratic Party, and the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund-contended that the photo identification law was overly burdensome on voters. The Supreme Court rejected this argument and found that, "the inconvenience of making a trip to the [Bureau of Motor Vehicles], gathering the required documents, and posing for a photograph surely does not qualify as a substantial burden on the right to vote, or even represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting."

The American Unity Legal Defense Fund (AULDF) hailed the decision as a setback to the growing practice of fraudulent voting nationwide-including voting by non-citizens. "The court was not prepared to invalidate an effective statute just because a few Indiana voters found bringing a picture ID to the polls to be a minor inconvenience," said AULDF's Hakola. "It was not unreasonable for Indiana to want to avoid both the actual voter fraud caused by impersonation and the loss of citizen confidence that accompanies media coverage of such fraud."

Mrs. Hakola went on to say, "The lack of immigration law enforcement is of deep concern to an overwhelming number of Americans. At least now the threat of voter fraud by illegal aliens has lessened, but only if other states follow Indiana's lead."

The American Unity Legal Defense Fund's amicus curiae brief was filed in support of Indiana's Voter identification law, and asked the Court to consider that voting fraud by illegal aliens is a growing problem which is likely to get worse. "Every vote by a non-citizen cancels the vote of an American citizen and damages our representative government," Mrs. Hakola explained.

Mrs. Hakola, a Virginia attorney and former Reagan appointee to the ten-member council of the Administrative Conference of the United States, said: "Voters who fear that their legitimate vote will be outweighed by non-citizens who fraudulently casts ballots would be discouraged from exercising their right to vote. The Supreme Court has gone a long way toward restoring confidence in our voting process-and just in time for the 2008 Presidential elections."

The American Unity Legal Defense Fund is an independent, national, non-profit educational organization dedicated to preserving America's historical unity by addressing important public policy issues, including genuine immigration reform.