Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 04 APRIL 2008

DHS Circles The Wagons And Refuses To Budge On No-Match Rule

Littler Mendelson
Explore more from Littler Mendelson

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a Supplemental Proposed Rule on March 21, 2008, and published it in the Federal Register, reissuing its "No-Match Letter" guidance.

United StatesImmigration
Littler Mendelson, P.C.
Littler Mendelson, P.C.
Author LinkedIn connections

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a Supplemental Proposed Rule on March 21, 2008, and published it in the Federal Register, reissuing its "No-Match Letter" guidance. A prior final rule was published on August 15, 2007, but a federal court enjoined implementation of the rule in October 2007. The litigation has been stayed awaiting DHS's supplemental rulemaking. The substance of the rule remains the same; DHS has attempted only to clarify the intent and impact of the prior rule.

Overview – Litigation

In August 2007, DHS issued a final rule, providing that the receipt of a Social Security Administration (SSA) no-match letter can be evidence that the employer has constructive knowledge that an employee lacks work authorization. (See Littler's August 2007 ASAP, http://www.littler.com/presspublications/index.cfm?event=pubitem&pubitemid=17086&childviewid=249 DHS Publishes Final "Safe-Harbor"

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

October 2026 Visa Bulletin Advances EB-5 Filing Date For Mainland China By 4 Years

The U.S. Department of State has released the October 2026 Visa Bulletin, marking the start of fiscal year 2027 with significant changes to employment-based immigrant visa categories. How will the advancement of priority dates, particularly the substantial four-year leap for mainland China-born EB-5 investors in the Dates for Filing chart, impact eligible applicants seeking adjustment of status benefits?
GlobalImmigration
Greenberg Traurig
Greenberg Traurig
Article

DHS Continues Work Authorization For Ukrainian, Sudanese TPS Beneficiaries; I-9 Guidance Remains Unclear

The Department of Homeland Security has not issued formal determinations for Temporary Protected Status designations for Ukraine and Sudan despite the October 19, 2026 expiration date, creating uncertainty for employers navigating Form I-9 compliance and employment authorization documentation. USCIS states that affected individuals retain TPS protections and work authorization, but has not updated operational guidance to explain how employers should document continued employment eligibility or handle
United StatesImmigration
Greenberg Traurig
Greenberg Traurig
Article

DHS Proposes New OPT Fees: What It Means For F-1 Students, Schools, Employers

The Department of Homeland Security has proposed imposing fees of $70,000 for initial Optional Practical Training periods and $30,000 for subsequent periods including STEM extensions, with schools bearing the direct cost burden. The proposal aims to combat fraud and abuse within the OPT program while protecting U.S. workers, but could significantly impact international student hiring strategies and the availability of OPT talent for employers.
United StatesImmigration
Jackson Lewis P.C.
Jackson Lewis P.C.
Article

DHS Proposes $70,000 And $30,000 Fees For F-1 Optional Practical Training

The Department of Homeland Security has proposed a controversial new rule requiring SEVP-certified schools to pay substantial fees—$70,000 for a student's first Optional Practical Training recommendation and $30,000 for each subsequent OPT application, including STEM extensions. With only a 30-day comment period and potential annual costs reaching up to $16.5 billion across nearly 2,500 affected institutions, the proposed regulation is expected to face significant legal challenges if finalized.
United StatesImmigration
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP