Ketchikan Drywall Services (KDS) has four full time employees, and about 20 part-time employees, and hires additional employees as needed on a project-by-project basis. KDS requires applicants to apply at their office, and fill out I-9 forms. Despite the efforts o a new Controller to improve compliance with the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), KDS was found to have failed to comply with in 225 out of 271 alleged violations, and appealed to the Circuit Court.

1.) What were the legal issues in this case? What did the appeals court decide?

2.) What arguments does this employer make for why its actions did not violate the IRCA or were, at most, minor, technical violations? Why does the court reject these arguments?

3.) What factors are considered in determining the penalties for IRCA violations? Why does the court reject this employer’s arguments for a lesser penalty? Should penalties only be assessed when it is shown that a violation of IRCA requirements resulted in the hiring of a worker not authorized to work in the United State? Why or why not?

4.) What are the practical implications of this case for employers?