|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ImmigrationAlthough freedom of movement is often recognized as a civil right, the freedom only applies to movement within national borders: it may be guaranteed by the constitution or by human rights legislation. Additionally, this freedom is often limited to citizens and excludes others. No state currently allows full freedom of movement across its borders, and international human rights treaties do not confer a general right to enter anotherstate. According to Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, citizens may not be forbidden to leave their country. There is no similar provision regarding entry of non-citizens. Those who reject this distinction on ethical grounds, argue that the freedom of movement both within and between countries is a basic human right, and that the restrictive immigration policies, typical of nation-states, violate this human right of freedom of movement. Such arguments are common among anti-state ideologies like anarchism and libertarianism. Where immigration is permitted, it is typically selective. Ethnic selection, such as the White Australia policy, has generally disappeared, but priority is usually given to the educated, skilled, and wealthy--which is in direct contradiction to the needs of the labour market (demanding un-skilled and poor people with low levels of education, willing to do jobs wealthier locals refuse to do). Less privileged individuals, including
the mass of poor people in low-income countries, cannot avail of the legal and protected immigration opportunities offered by wealthy states. This inequality has also been criticised as conflicting with the principle of equal opportunities, which apply (at least in theory) within democratic nation-states. The fact that the door is closed for the unskilled, while at the same time many developed countries have a huge demand for unskilled labour, is a major factor in undocumented immigration. The contradictory nature
of this policy - which specifically disadvantages the unskilled immigrants while exploiting their labour - has also been criticised on ethical grounds.
The focus of many of the state immigration laws is the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) E-Verify system. The E-Verify system allows employers, after enrolling and signing a memorandum of understanding, to share information with the DHS and Social Security Administration and to check the newly-hired employee's employment authorization against the databases for those agencies.
As an employer, not only are you required to ensure that you are in compliance with federal immigration laws, but must also determine which state immigration laws apply and when and how state-level compliance is triggered. The first thing to determine is whether your company is doing business in any of the states which have enacted employment-related immigration laws. Once you have identified the applicable states, you next have to establish whether the state law applies to your business within that state, and if so, when you are required to start complying with the law.
|
|
|
Helpful Links USCIS Passports Greencards Adoption Field Offices |
|
|
