The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has recently announced several settlements addressing various forms of employment discrimination based on citizenship status and national origin.

These cases, handled by the Civil Rights Division’s Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (IER) since June 2024, provide lessons for employers about hiring practices and document verification processes.

Temporary Protected Status (TPS): A Chicago-based transportation and parking management company settled a case involving the rejection of an Employment Authorization Document (EAD) from a worker with Temporary Protected Status (TPS).

In certain circumstances, such as ongoing litigation or administrative delays, the federal government may automatically extend the validity of EADs beyond their printed expiration date. Employers need to be aware of these extensions and know how to verify them.

In this situation, the company incorrectly rejected the EAD because the document listed the employee’s country of birth as the Bahamas, rather than Haiti, the country through which she has a TPS. To verify the EAD, the employer could have checked the category code through the USCIS website, which would have showed a valid extension.

As part of the settlement, the company agreed to offer reinstatement and backpay to the affected worker. They will also pay a civil penalty of $2,000.

Unjustified Citizenship Preference in Hiring: A Wisconsin-based transportation management company settled a case after withdrawing a job offer based solely on the candidate’s non-U.S. citizen status. IER concluded the company did not have any legal justification for withdrawing the offer.

Employers cannot exclude people with permission to work in the United States because of their citizenship status unless citizenship status is explicitly required by law or contract. The company will pay a civil penalty of $4,610, compensate the affected worker, and implement changes to prevent similar incidents in the future.

Non-Compliant Job Advertisements: An online staffing agency, operating nationwide, settled a case involving job advertisements that contained unlawful hiring restrictions based on citizenship status. This practice potentially deterred qualified candidates from applying and led to the improper screening of applicants based on their citizenship status.

The settlement includes substantial financial penalties: $232,500 in civil penalties and $325,000 set aside for affected workers. The case demonstrates the need for careful review of job postings to ensure they do not contain discriminatory language or requirements.

Discriminatory Document Verification Practices: A California-based staffing agency, as a successor to a previous business entity, settled a case involving discriminatory document verification practices. The previous entity had required non-U.S. citizens to present specific documentation to prove work authorization, while allowing U.S. citizens more flexibility.

Workers have the right to choose which valid, legally acceptable documents to present for verification. As part of the settlement, the employer agreed to pay $46,050 in civil penalties.

Employers should take notice

These settlements reflect the DOJ’s commitment to enforcing the anti-discrimination provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

In several statements, Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke emphasized that employers must not discriminate based on citizenship status or national origin when verifying work authorization or during the hiring process.