Displaced American workers sue the Department of Homeland Security over visa work permits
A group of displaced American workers are suing the Department of Homeland Security over that agency’s expansion of work permits. You can read the full complaint here. This group is called Save Jobs USA and this is who comprises the group:
8. Plaintiff Save Jobs USA is an unincorporated group of computer workers formed by Americans who were employed at Southern California Edison (“SCE”) until they were replaced by foreign workers imported on H- 1B guest worker visas. They formed Save Jobs USA to address the problems American workers face from foreign labor entering the United States job market through visa programs.
9. Save Jobs USA members are direct economic competitors with H-1B workers. As a result of DHS’ H-4 Rule that will be effective May 26, 2015, Save Jobs USA members are economic competitors with H-4 visa holders as well.
They claim the Department of Homeland Security does not have the authority to expand the H-1B and H-4 rules, here is more:
Plaintiff Save Jobs USA (“Save Jobs USA”) brings this complaint against the United States Department of Homeland Security and states:
1. This case arises under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 551; and the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201 et seq.
2. Save Jobs USA hereby challenges a regulation recently promulgated by the United States Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) that grants work authorization to certain H-1B dependent spouse aliens who possess H-4 visas.
3. The regulation at issue is the Employment Authorization for Certain H- 4 Dependent Spouses, 80 Fed. Reg., 10,284 (Feb. 25, 2015) (codified at 8 C.F.R. parts 214 and 274a) (the “H-4 Rule”).
4. According to DHS, the H-4 Rule will add as many as 179,600 new foreign workers in the first year and 55,000 annually in subsequent years. 80 Fed. Reg. 10,285.
5. The H-4 Rule is in excess of DHS authority and directly contradicts several provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) of 1952, as amended, including, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(a)(15)(H), 1182(a)(5)(A), 1182(n), 1184(g).
And here is now the new expansion has hurt the plaintiffs:
23. DHS’s H-4 Rule, which grants work authorization to H-4 visa holders, injures Save Jobs USA’s members by (1) depriving them of statutory protections from foreign labor (8 U.S.C. §§ 1182(a)(5)(A), 1182(n), 1184(g)); (2) by increasing the number of economic competitors; and (3) by conferring benefits to their economic competitors on H-1B visas.
24. Save Jobs USA is composed of technology workers who were formerly employed at SCE until they were replaced by aliens on H-1B visas. The purpose of the organization is to reform guest worker visas programs to protect the wages, job opportunities, and working conditions of its members.
25. Save Jobs USA identifies three of its members who would have standing to bring this action on his own: Brian Buchanan, Julie Gutierrez, and Steven Bradley. These members have all been replaced by H-1B workers and remain in competition with H-1B workers, and soon H-4 visa holders, in the job market.
The complaint then goes on to explain the plight of these people and I would suggest you check out the link I provided above.
I do not expect this lawsuit to go anywhere but at least somebody is making a real effort to fight back, which is more than can be said of the Republicans in the Congress who are only paying lip service to this issue for political reasons and it will be interesting to watch this if it does move forward.
Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
America's Watchtower 
Reblogged this on rennydiokno.com.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks again my friend!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Too bad they filed it in D.C. court. Though it might go to the Supremes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I wouldn’t see surprised if the DC court through it out but maybe this will make its way through the courts.
LikeLike
It only makes sense with so few jobs that you would not bring in outside “help”, but then again when has sense played a part in this Administration? Maybe these are the jobs that Americans won’t do, right? Right?
LikeLiked by 2 people
It is all part of fundamentally changing America I suppose…
LikeLiked by 2 people
The reason for filing in the case in the D.C. Circuit is that the court has a large body of case law in this area. The legal issues in this case are not the type of novel issues where you look for a judge’s political leaning. We just need a judge who will apply the law consistently; not a judge with any particular political leanings.
The legal question can be simply stated: Does 8 USC 1324a(h) grant the executive branch unfettered authority to allow any alien to work in the United States?
If the answer is NO, Save Jobs USA wins.
If the answer is YES, the court upends decades of precedent, nullifies entire sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and turns the immigration system on its head.
In all administrative cases like this, the judges look for ways to throw them out on standing (thus avoiding the choice above). However, the D.C. Circuit has repeatedly held that it has repeatedly held that when an agency action increases the number of competitors for a party, that party has standing to challenge the regulations. While the government will certainly do so, it will be hart to argue that Americans who have been replaced by H-1B workers are not competitors with H-1B workers.
Because the violation here is so egregious, standing decides the case. Therefore, paragraphs 23–25 are key parts of the complaint (I commend the poster for spotting that above). In fact, it is likely that the government will sacrifice their arguments on the merits of the case to argue standing.
If they do throw it out, another group will challenge the regulations. We can keep doing that until we find the plaintiff that does have standing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for what you are doing John. I got your email but I have not had time to visit the links yet. It sounds like you have a good angle on this and are well prepared and I hope you guys can make some waves. I will be following this closely.
LikeLike