Legal/Law/Criminal Justice and Reform

Supreme Court Justices Bash Lawyer Defending Company Undercutting American Jobs With Cheap Migrant Labor

Wikimedia Commons

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday for Department of Labor vs. Sun Valley Orchards, with the justices taking turns grilling the latter’s lawyer.

Rob Johnson, arguing on behalf of Sun Valley Orchards, contended that imposing penalties over immigration contracts was a power reserved for courts, not the Executive Branch’s internal adjudication. Johnson faced criticism from both the liberal and conservative justices on the Supreme Court with lawyers representing the Department of Labor (DOL) also rebutting Johnson, arguing that Supreme Court precedent established the Executive Branch’s power to levy such penalties in immigration cases.

“I feel at the base of your argument, Mr. Johnson, you’re trying to get us to think that the H2A program is not an immigration program. But it is an immigration program. It’s all about when do we allow the admission of foreign workers, given the fact that we’re concerned that foreign workers will undercut the economic status of domestic workers,” Associate Justice Elena Kagan said.

The DOL fined Sun Valley Orchards $550,000 in 2015 after an inspection revealed that the living conditions on the farm violated H-2A seasonal agricultural worker program rules meant to protect American workers from being undercut by cheaper foreign labor. Sun Valley Orchards appealed on the basis that these civil penalties relate to contract law and thus should be adjudicated in courts rather than internally in the DOL, in accordance with Article Three of the Constitution.

“You’re not arguing in this case, say all that all civil penalties must be [adjudicated through] Article Three?” Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked Johnson.

Johnson agreed.

“So you recognize exceptions, with immigration being one of them?” Kavanaugh continued.

Johnson affirmed.

“But I thought you said earlier that in [the immigration] context all civil penalties should fall under Article Three. Did you say that earlier?” Kavanaugh said.

“So I think that–” Johnson was interrupted.

“Can I get an answer?” Kavanaugh asked.

“Can I distinguish between the rule that I would advocate –” Johnson was interrupted again.

“Can you say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to him, because I thought you said that too?” Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett interjected.

“Yes, but I don’t think the Court should go that far in this case,” Johnson said.

“You’re going to need to explain that now,” Kavanaugh said, laughing.

The DOL argued that under the Supreme Court decision in Oceanic Steam Navigation Co. v. Stranahan, precedent exists for the Executive Branch levying fines on corporations breaking immigration law through internal adjudication.

Johnson argued that Oceanic was an immigration admissions case, because its root involved whether the Executive Branch could fine boats importing diseased migrants. He contended that the Sun Valley Orchards case was different because the migrants were already in the country.

“I have to tell you, Mr. Johnson, I’m struggling with your argument a little bit. You said that the difference between this case and Oceanic is the nature of the claims and the nature of the remedies. The nature of the claims, you said, ‘well, Oceanic was an admissions case; of course, the government has complete authority to use administrative adjudications with respect to admissions.’ Well, this is also an admissions case. An employer has gone to the government and said, ‘We are going to make various certifications so that you will allow us to bring in a boatload of foreign workers.’ What the government is now saying is that the admissions requirements put on those workers have been violated. Remedy there: civil fines, and so here: civil fines,” Kagan said.

Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor suggested that the purpose of the precedent set in Oceanic makes the ruling still relevant today, even though Oceanic concerned admission at the border and Sun Valley Orchards concerns matters within the country.

“Oceanic was at a time when immigration was totally different […] [but] as soon as immigration became a problem, we had administrative processes to punish employers who have lied to bring people in,” Sotomayor said.