DOJ Issues best Practice Advice for Employers Facing I-9 Audits
2 min read
Feb 15, 2012
The Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practice recently released advice on best practices for employers to use in response to audits by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The Office of the Special Counsel specifically advises that employers need to effectively communicate with employees and unions to assure that the audit process is transparent and not discriminatory. To do this, employers should develop a uniform plan for informing all employees that the employer is subject to an ICE audit. Employers should provide all workers with a reasonable amount of time to correct discrepancies in their records identified by ICE and treat all workers in the same manner during the audit. This means that all workers with like discrepancies who are asked to present additional documents are provided with the same time frames and the same choice of Form I-9 documents to present.
The Office of the Special Counsel further advises that an employer should assure that an employee knows why the employer is seeking I-9 information. The employer should tell employees from whom it seeks information that the information is sought in response to an audit. The best practice is to relay this information in writing and describe the specific basis for the discrepancy and/or what information is needed. Moreover, if employees are represented by a union, the employer should inform the union of the ICE audit and determine whether a collective bargaining agreement triggers any obligations.
There are also several practices the Office of the Special Counsel suggests employers avoid. For example, an employer should not selectively verify the employment eligibility of certain employees based on their national origin or citizenship status. An employee should not be treated differently at any point during the audit because they look or sound foreign, or based on assumptions about whether they are authorized to work in the U.S. In addition, no employee should be terminated or suspended without providing them with notice and a reasonable opportunity to present valid Form I-9 documents.
As far as the collection of documents, the Office of Special Counsel suggests that an employer should not ask an employee to provide additional evidence of employment eligibility or more documents than ICE is requiring it to obtain, but should also not limit the range of documents that employees are allowed to present for purposes of the Form I-9. By doing this, the employer gives the employee the opportunity to present valid documentation but does not require more than is legally necessary.
An employer’s response to an I-9 audit can raise challenges and tension with employees. The advice of the Office of the Special Counsel aids employers in reducing these conflicts without compromising their obligations to comply with the audit. As such, employers should utilize this advice during I-9 audits.
Topics
Featured Insights

Employment Law Observer
Aug 10, 2026
As Leaves Fall, Leave Requests Rise: Are You Compliant With Chicago’s Expanded Rules?

Press Release
Aug 7, 2026
Daniel McGrath Re-Elected Senior Director of the Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel

Insights for Insurers Alert
Aug 7, 2026
California Supreme Court Clarifies Pleading Standards for Excess Policy Claims

Press Release
Aug 6, 2026
Charles Townsend Named a Best Mentor Finalist in the 2026 ALM Texas Legal Awards

Webinar
Aug 5, 2026
April Toy Moderates HNBA Webinar on AI in the Practice of Law

Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert
Aug 5, 2026
2026 AI Compliance: Upcoming Laws Every Organization Needs to Know

Press Release
July 21, 2026 | Updated on August 4, 2026
Three Hinshaw Attorneys Named to the 2026 National Black Lawyers’ Top 40 Under 40 List

Healthcare Alert
Aug 3, 2026
Fixing the Emergency Refill Trap: What California’s AB 1587 Means for Pharmacies

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Jul 30, 2026
Should Text Messages be Considered “Calls” Under the TCPA? The Seventh Circuit Says No

Healthcare Alert
Jul 30, 2026
California Courts Sharply Curtail the MICRA Damages Cap in Nursing Home Litigation

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 30, 2026
Analyzing a Couple of Cases Involving Exclusions in D&O Policies

