DOJ Alleges Illinois Workplace Privacy Law Infringes Federal Immigration Authority
The Department of Justice (DOJ) said on May 1 that it has filed a complaint against Illinois and its Department of Labor, alleging that the state's Right to Privacy in the Workplace Act interferes with federal immigration authority.
The
'Any state that incentivizes illegal immigration and makes it harder for federal authorities to do their job will face legal consequences from this Administration,' Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a
The DOJ said the state law includes provisions that complicates the use of E-Verify and deter employers from using the system in their hiring process. E-Verify is a federal program that allows employers to electronically confirm the employment eligibility of a job applicant.
Senate Bill 508, which took effect on Jan. 1, states that employers in Illinois 'shall not voluntarily enroll' in the E-Verify program unless legally required, according to a
It also requires employers to notify employees of any inspections of I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification forms, which are used to verify an employee's identity and ability to work in the country, within 72 hours of receiving the inspection notice.
Related Stories
4/30/2025
4/26/2025
This notification requirement, the DOJ said in its complaint, could cause an employee who is working illegally in Illinois to skip work on the day of inspection or to 'abscond indefinitely' to avoid detection by immigration authorities.
The complaint states that Illinois's law 'discourages the use of E-Verify, frustrates innovation of employment eligibility verification, and obfuscates E-Verify and Form I-9 inspection requirements by adding layers of protection for employees and imposing onerous and confusing notice requirements for Illinois employers beyond those required' under the federal immigration law.
The DOJ said the state's rules violate the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution and other federal laws designed to combat the employment of illegal aliens in the country, and asked the court to issue a preliminary injunction to block Illinois from enforcing some provisions.
The Epoch Times has reached out to the Illinois Department of Labor for comment but did not receive a response by the time of publication.
The complaint follows
The complaint contends that by refusing to honor civil detainers and warrants authorized by Congress, Illinois and Chicago have effectively dismantled key mechanisms needed by federal immigration officials to carry out their duties.
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker
'We need to get rid of the violent criminals, but we also need to protect people, at least the residents of Illinois and all across the nation, who are just doing what we hope that immigrants will do,' Pritzker said.
Tom Ozimek contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - No amount of marijuana is safe for teens
'Since the failed war on drugs began more than 50 years ago, the prohibition of marijuana has ruined lives, families and communities, particularly communities of color,' House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) recently said while announcing a bipartisan bill to legalize cannabis that the federal level. Jeffries added that the bill 'will lay the groundwork to finally right these wrongs in a way that advances public safety.' But the growing body of evidence on cannabis's effects on kids suggests this is not true at all. Cannabis legalization efforts across the U.S. have greatly accelerated over the last 15 years. Despite some recent success at anti-legalization efforts (e.g., Florida and North Dakota voters rejected in 2024 an adult use bill), the widespread public support for cannabis reform has translated to nearly half of U.S. states permitting adult use of cannabis, and 46 states with some form of a medical cannabis program. Though all legal-marijuana states have set the minimum age at 21, underage use has become a significant health concern. National data indicate that in 2024, 16.2 percent of 12th graders reported cannabis use in the past 30 days, and about 5.1 percent indicated daily use. To compound matters, product potency levels of the main intoxicant in the cannabis plant, THC (or Delta-9), have skyrocketed, from approximately 5 percent in the 1970s to upwards of 95 percent in THC concentrate products today. Even street-weed is routinely five to six times more potent than it was back in the day. The pro-cannabis landscape has likely moved teen perceptions of cannabis use. A prior encouraging trend of the 1970s and 1980s, when more and more teens each year perceived use of cannabis to be harmful, is now in reverse. Only 35.9 percent of 12th graders view regular cannabis use as harmful, compared to 50.4 percent in 1980. This is happening even as research is showing that cannabis is more deleterious to young people than we previously believed. The negative effects of cannabis use on a teenager can be seen across a range of behaviors. Changes may be subtle at first and masked as typical teenage turmoil. But ominous signs can soon emerge, including changes in friends, loss of interest in school and hobbies, and use on a daily basis. The usual pushback against parental rules and expectations becomes anger and defiance. For many, underlying issues of depression and anxiety get worse. And there is a vast body of scientific research indicating that teen-onset use of THC use significantly increases the risk of addiction and can be a trigger for developing psychosis, including schizophrenia. The pro-cannabis trend is not occurring in a vacuum. Those entrusted with protecting the health and well-being of youth — parents, community leaders, policy makers — have dropped the ball on the issue. Policymakers tout exaggerated claims that THC is a source of wellness and safer than alcohol or nicotine. In some states, cannabis-based edibles are sold in convenience stores. Many parents have a rearview-mirror perception of cannabis, as they assume the products these days are the water-downed versions from the 1960's and '70s. Aggravating matters are the influences of some business interests. The playbook from Big Tobacco is now being used by Big Cannabis: political donations, legislative lobbying, media support, and claims that solutions to social problems will follow legalization. The debate on the public health impact of legalizing cannabis will continue. We hope the discourse and policies will follow the science and give priority to the health and well-being of youth. An international panel of elite researchers on cannabis recently concluded that there is no level of cannabis use that is safe, and if use occurs, it's vital to refrain until after puberty. The National Academy of Sciences and the National Institute on Drug Abuse also agree with these guidelines. One state — Minnesota — is requiring school-based drug prevention programs to include specific information on cannabis harms, a hopeful trend for other states to follow. When recreational cannabis is made available to adults, perhaps we assume that legal restrictions to those age 21 and older is a sufficient guardrail. But history tells us that youth will indulge in adult-only activities. The pro-cannabis environment in the U.S. poses a public health challenge to young people. There isn't a single challenge of being a teenager that cannabis will help solve. Sadly, this is a message that is not getting enough attention. Naomi Schaefer Riley is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, where she focuses on child welfare and foster care issues. Ken Winters is a senior scientist at the Minnesota branch of the Oregon Research Institute and is the co-founder of Smart Approaches to Marijuana Minnesota. This essay is adapted from a chapter in the forthcoming edited volume, 'Mind the Children: How to Think About the Youth Mental Health Collapse.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump administration reverses course on DOGE-driven closure of water science center
Chattahoochee Riverkeeper Jason Ulseth leads a team in monitoring water quality and groundwater levels along a river that provides drinking water to millions of Georgians. Photo contributed by Chattahoochee Riverkeeper The U.S. Geological Survey's South Atlantic Water Science Center in Norcross will remain open following backlash over the Department of Government Efficiency's proposal to terminate the lease. The U.S. Department of the Interior announced this week that the center will not have its lease terminated in order to continue critical water quality testing along the Chattahoochee River, which supplies drinking water to millions of Georgians. Interior Acting Assistant Secretary Tyler Hassen sent letters this week informing the Georgia U.S. Sens. Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock of the decision. Earlier this year, the Elon Musk-led DOGE listed the property among 164 Interior buildings and offices under consideration for closure as part of its campaign to reduce government spending. The DOGE website previously projected the federal government would save $1.3 million by not renewing the lease for the Norcross center. This spring, Warnock and Ossoff urged the feds not to eliminate vital work that includes monitoring E. coli bacteria and flood levels throughout Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina. 'In some cases, the department took action to reverse a termination due to the critical nature of the mission, unavailability of alternative, cost-effective solutions, or the specialized nature of the facility,' Hassen wrote. 'You will be pleased to know that the GSA rescinded the termination of the USGS lease in Norcross, Georgia.' Hassen, a former Texas oil executive, served on Musk's DOGE team and is awaiting Senate confirmation for his new role with the Department of the Interior. For several years, the Norcross water science center has worked with Chattahoochee Riverkeeper on the BacteriALERT program, which provides live updates to the public of the amount of E. coli contamination in the river. 'Chattahoochee Riverkeeper is pleased that the Department of the Interior has reversed the termination of the lease for the USGS South Atlantic Water Science Center,' Chattahoochee Riverkeeper Jason Ulseth said Friday. 'We thank Senators Ossoff and Warnock for their leadership and are grateful for their work to ensure this vital resource remains in place for all who depend on it.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump and Newsom on collision course as fight over National Guard intensifies in court
President Donald Trump and California Gov. Gavin Newsom are headed for another legal clash next week after the president activated the National Guard to respond to anti-immigration enforcement protests and riots in Los Angeles. The anticipated showdown will take place on Tuesday and comes after Judge Charles Breyer, a Clinton appointee, ruled Thursday night that Trump's use of the National Guard was illegal and ordered the president to temporarily relinquish control of the soldiers. Newsom, a Democrat, celebrated the ruling, saying Trump had deployed the National Guard to his state out of "vanity" and to "instill fear" and to "incite a response." But Newsom's win was short-lived as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit quickly put Breyer's decision on hold in a matter of hours. The appellate court's stay will remain in place at least through Tuesday, when attorneys for the California Attorney General's Office and the Trump administration argue before a three-judge panel about whether the court should grant a longer-term stay. Retired Justice Stephen Breyer's Brother Assigned To Newsom National Guard Lawsuit Judges Mark Bennett and Eric Miller, both Trump appointees, and Judge Jennifer Sung, a Biden appointee, will hear the arguments. Read On The Fox News App For now, Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth can continue to deploy thousands of National Guard soldiers in California, as well as hundreds of Marines. Trump and Hegseth indicated in court papers that military forces would be used strictly to protect federal personnel and federal buildings as they faced attacks by anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) rioters in recent days. Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys argued that a judge's decision to block the Trump administration from carrying out these military activities "would judicially countermand the Commander in Chief's military directives," especially if the decision were issued through a temporary restraining order, like what Breyer issued Thursday night. "That would be unprecedented. It would be constitutionally anathema. And it would be dangerous," the DOJ attorneys said. Former Ag Barr Shreds Gavin Newsom's 'Nonsense' Legal Claims As Trump Sends In Troops To Quell La Riots The decision by Breyer, the 83-year-old brother of retired liberal Justice Stephen Breyer, was met with skepticism by some. Attorney Ed Whelan, a right-of-center former DOJ official, said in remarks online that it was "far more sweeping" than he had expected. Whelan said a significant legal fight could be brewing over the provision of Title 10 that Trump used to federalize the National Guard. Typically, presidents deploy National Guard members with a governor's consent, but the law leaves room for debate on whether the governor's permission is required. Whelan speculated that Trump could attempt to use another provision of Title 10, the Insurrection Act, to bypass the court proceedings. "10 USC 252 seems to give him much freer authority," Whelan said, citing the insurrection law. The National Guard fight comes against the backdrop of Trump hosting a major military parade in Washington, D.C. on Saturday. The event, slated to cost tens of millions of dollars, will showcase U.S. military power and commemorate the Army's 250th birthday. Trump's birthday is also that day. Judge Mulls Trump's Authority Over National Guard, Warns Us Is Not 'King George' Monarchy Trump's critics have coined the day "No Kings Day" and are planning to voice their objections to the president's show of force at protests around the country on Saturday. California alone is expected to see dozens of protests. While Trump is in the nation's capital, the protesters will be "literally everywhere else," Ezra Levin, one of the organizers, told the left-leaning Contrarian on Substack. "It's the 250th anniversary of the Continental Army, which was formed to push back against a mad king," Levin said, noting the protests would be peaceful and serve as a recruitment tool in the "pro-Democracy fight" against article source: Trump and Newsom on collision course as fight over National Guard intensifies in court
