Employment Authorization, Alienage Discrimination and Executive Authority

Leticia M. Saucedo
{"title":"Employment Authorization, Alienage Discrimination and Executive Authority","authors":"Leticia M. Saucedo","doi":"10.15779/Z38VH5CJ1K","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Undocumented individuals with deferred action find themselves in a kafkaesque position, and neither scholars nor courts have persuasively addressed how their liminal immigration status affects their rights in the workplace. Many begin with the intuitive assumption that immigration and employment law are in a fundamental and unresolvable tension with each other. On one hand, anti-discrimination principles protect noncitizens from alienage discrimination in the workplace. On the other hand, Congress enacted employer sanctions precisely to keep undocumented noncitizens out of the workplace. In the face of this dilemma, the default approach is to conclude without analysis that employers (and states) must be able to deny rights and benefits to undocumented noncitizens. This creates a true dilemma for the employment-authorized undocumented worker, and challenges the federal government’s acknowledged power to authorize employment for noncitizens. In this Article, I argue that employment-authorized undocumented workers are protected from workplace discrimination even though they do not have legal status in the eyes of immigration law. If a purpose of employment law is to balance the “inherent inequality of bargaining power between employer and employee,” then employment authorization should offer protections that achieve bargaining equality, including protections for undocumented immigrants against discrimination based on their foreign-born status. On the other hand, in an increasingly anxious society concerned with growing numbers of undocumented noncitizens, the urge to limit rights and benefits that come with liminal immigration status such as deferred action is heightened. Recent Supreme Court holdings, both in and outside the immigration arena, however, support an evolving theory of workplace protection for workers in liminal immigration categories. I draw from these cases to suggest the revival of a theory that fuses liberty and equality principles with federalism and structuralism to protect noncitizens as historically disadvantaged groups. Toward this end, I explore three concepts – employment authorization, executive authority and alienage nondiscrimination principles – that together provide the foundation for protecting the employment authorized undocumented worker.","PeriodicalId":81320,"journal":{"name":"Georgetown immigration law journal","volume":"165 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Georgetown immigration law journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38VH5CJ1K","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Undocumented individuals with deferred action find themselves in a kafkaesque position, and neither scholars nor courts have persuasively addressed how their liminal immigration status affects their rights in the workplace. Many begin with the intuitive assumption that immigration and employment law are in a fundamental and unresolvable tension with each other. On one hand, anti-discrimination principles protect noncitizens from alienage discrimination in the workplace. On the other hand, Congress enacted employer sanctions precisely to keep undocumented noncitizens out of the workplace. In the face of this dilemma, the default approach is to conclude without analysis that employers (and states) must be able to deny rights and benefits to undocumented noncitizens. This creates a true dilemma for the employment-authorized undocumented worker, and challenges the federal government’s acknowledged power to authorize employment for noncitizens. In this Article, I argue that employment-authorized undocumented workers are protected from workplace discrimination even though they do not have legal status in the eyes of immigration law. If a purpose of employment law is to balance the “inherent inequality of bargaining power between employer and employee,” then employment authorization should offer protections that achieve bargaining equality, including protections for undocumented immigrants against discrimination based on their foreign-born status. On the other hand, in an increasingly anxious society concerned with growing numbers of undocumented noncitizens, the urge to limit rights and benefits that come with liminal immigration status such as deferred action is heightened. Recent Supreme Court holdings, both in and outside the immigration arena, however, support an evolving theory of workplace protection for workers in liminal immigration categories. I draw from these cases to suggest the revival of a theory that fuses liberty and equality principles with federalism and structuralism to protect noncitizens as historically disadvantaged groups. Toward this end, I explore three concepts – employment authorization, executive authority and alienage nondiscrimination principles – that together provide the foundation for protecting the employment authorized undocumented worker.
就业授权、异化歧视与行政权力
被推迟行动的无证个人发现自己处于一种卡夫卡式的境地,学者和法院都没有令人信服地解决他们有限的移民身份如何影响他们在工作场所的权利。许多人一开始就直觉地认为,移民法和就业法之间存在着根本的、无法解决的紧张关系。一方面,反歧视原则保护非公民在工作场所免受异化歧视。另一方面,国会颁布的雇主制裁恰恰是为了将无证非公民赶出工作场所。面对这种困境,默认的做法是不经分析就得出结论:雇主(和国家)必须能够剥夺无证非公民的权利和福利。这给就业授权的无证工人造成了一个真正的困境,并挑战了联邦政府公认的授权非公民就业的权力。在这篇文章中,我认为,就业授权的无证工人受到保护,免受工作场所的歧视,即使他们在移民法的眼中没有合法地位。如果就业法的目的是平衡“雇主和雇员之间固有的议价能力不平等”,那么就业授权就应该提供实现议价平等的保护,包括保护无证移民免受基于其外国出生身份的歧视。另一方面,在一个对越来越多的无证非公民感到担忧的日益焦虑的社会中,限制限制移民身份所带来的权利和福利(如暂缓遣返)的呼声日益高涨。然而,最近最高法院在移民领域内外的裁决,都支持了一种不断发展的理论,即为限制移民类别的工人提供工作场所保护。我从这些案例中得出结论,建议复兴一种将自由和平等原则与联邦制和结构主义融合在一起的理论,以保护作为历史上弱势群体的非公民。为此,我探讨了三个概念——就业授权、行政权力和异化非歧视原则——它们共同为保护就业授权的无证工人提供了基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信