Trump Administration Criticizes E-Verify’s Reliability Amid Immigration Crackdown: A Look at the Program’s Weaknesses and Controversies

A small Maine resort town’s police department found itself embroiled in a controversy when one of its reserve officers was identified as an undocumented immigrant working in the U.S. illegally. The Department of Homeland Security swiftly highlighted the case, with an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) official stating, “The fact that a police department would hire an illegal alien and unlawfully issue him a firearm while on duty is not only comical but also tragic.”

ICE accused the department of deliberately disregarding federal laws, but the city argued that the fault lay with the federal verification program used to confirm Jon Luke Evans’ eligibility to work. Evans, who has since agreed to voluntarily leave the country after serving barely a month on the job, was confirmed employable by the I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification form and E-Verify database, tools relied upon by the Old Orchard Beach Police Chief Elise Chard at the time.

However, the Trump administration asserted that relying solely on E-Verify to validate an individual’s legal status is a violation of federal law, stating, “The Old Orchard Beach Police Department’s reckless reliance on E-Verify to justify arming an illegal alien… does not absolve them of their failure to conduct basic background checks to verify legal status.”

This statement from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) raised concerns about the program’s effectiveness, particularly as the Trump administration pushes for stricter immigration policies. Alexandra LaCombe, a partner at the Fisher Phillips law firm specializing in immigration law, noted, “I counsel folks that we can rely on these systems. That’s why they exist.”

First introduced under President Bill Clinton as a pilot program, E-Verify became nationwide in 2004. President George W. Bush emphasized the need for a more reliable system to help employers conduct immigration background checks, stating, “We can’t ask our employers to verify somebody here unless we help them.”

While comprehensive immigration reform failed to materialize due to conservative opposition, E-Verify remained in place. In 2008, Bush issued an order mandating immigration checks using E-Verify for federal government contractors. Today, ten states require its use by most employers, but it remains optional for most private American companies.

However, the Trump administration’s recent comments on E-Verify differ from the DHS’s official stance on its website, which claims that E-Verify “operates with speed and accuracy” and “is the only free, fast, online service of its kind that electronically confirms an employee’s information against millions of government records.”

Despite these promises, critics argue that the system is more of a barrier to legitimate workers than an effective deterrent to illegal immigration. Alex Nowrasteh, vice president for economic and social policy studies at the Cato Institute, stated, “It is very easy to fool E-Verify… All you need to do is give it the identity documents of somebody who is able to work. That’s it.”

This raises questions about employers’ responsibilities in verifying their employees’ documentation, with immigration attorney Dawn Lurie emphasizing, “It’s the employer’s job to ensure that they’re not accepting fraudulent documents.”

Issues with E-Verify extend beyond its failure to catch ineligible workers. During the most recent 12 months for which figures are available, more than 98% of people checked by E-Verify were confirmed eligible to work within 24 hours. However, with over 43 million checks conducted that year, even a small number of errors can impact many individuals.

A 2017 Cato study estimated that eligible workers in the U.S. lost out on about 130,000 jobs over a 10-year period due to incorrect flagging by E-Verify. Despite these concerns and calls for reform, efforts to expand the use of E-Verify continue, with some members of Congress advocating for its permanent implementation and universal adoption by employers.