Brief alleging H-1b visa is unconstitutional

[flexnor]

interesting read


QUESTIONS PRESENTED
1. Whether H-1B Legislation violates the constitutional rights of American workers


a) Does H-1B legislation violate the substantive due process liberty and property of American citizens by permitting employers to displace and replace American workers, and hire nonimmigrants when qualified American workers are available?


b) Does H-1B legislation violate equal protection by forcing American workers to compete with H-1B workers, whose indentured status to the sponsoring employer makes them more desirable?


c) Does the disproportionate use of H-1B by Indian companies and hiring managers demonstrate that the legislation has been implemented in a discriminatory manner?


answers in link below

http://www.programmersguild.org/docs/h1b_unconstitutional.html

[flexnor]

1. b is the most interesting

b) Does H-1B legislation violate equal protection by forcing American workers to compete with H-1B workers, whose indentured status to the sponsoring employer makes them more desirable?


a) H-1B legislation violates the substantive due process liberty and property of American citizens by permitting employers to displace and replace American workers, and hire nonimmigrants when qualified American workers are available

[drm604]

2. K&R

[HopeHoops]

3. I've got some serious problems with H-1B, but it isn't unconstitutional.

The biggest problem I have is how the workers are treated (setting aside the matter of displacing US workers).

I worked with a number of H-1B people over the years. They were paid less and essentially slaves. If they didn't do any and everything required by the company, they risked losing their sponsor. One in particular had just become a father and was laid off two weeks later. I have no idea what happened to him after that, but the laws would not be on his side.

Now, on the issue I set aside, the majority of H-1B visas are for tasks that could easily be filled by domestic labor. Employers prefer the H-1B workers for the reason I already mentioned - they have slaves. There really isn't any benefit to the system except for assholes who want to exploit everyone in their company. It isn't good for American workers. It isn't good for the H-1B employees. It is only good for the employer-sponsor.

[flexnor]

4. you're a very quick read, if you've already concluded that

i just put that out there a few minutes ago, and that's a long a complex brief with many caselaw references - you missed your calling, you could have been a very high dollar lawyer. I put it out 10 minutes before your post, you found it immediatly, read it completely, processed all of these caselaw references and rendered a judgement

my read of that brief is that introducing indentured labor as a standard after the fact of someone creating a livelyhood for themselves IS a deprevation of rights without due process

[Zalatix]

6. Hear, hear!

[HopeHoops]

7. I concluded that over ten years ago. I didn't read anything other than the OP.

I've worked with these people and they are slaves. No other way to put it.

[flexnor]

19. so you're not granting Certiorari on this?

well, i'm still honored to have a member of SCOTUS on this board

(and just a reminder, a member of SCOTUS is still just one vote out of 9, you need a majority to render a judgement)

[HopeHoops]

20. And yet the president appoints subject to Senate confirmation.

That's why the USSC is so fucked up right now.

[LiberalEsto]

13. And in order to keep their jobs, American IT workers have to work like slaves too

My IT worker husband routinely works 10-hour days or longer, and has to work from home almost every weekend.

[HopeHoops]

17. I did that anyway because, well, I'm a geek.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

5. There's no constitutional obligation to hire people

If that were the case than migrant workers would be de facto illegal. One could just as easily argue equal protection clauses and other civil rights law demand all persons inside the US are equally open to consideration.

And as congress gets to write immigration law -- per the constitution -- it's hard from them to violate that precept.

[LiberalEsto]

11. Affirmative action requires that certain people be hired

as a remedy to past injustice.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

14. That not a constitutional mandate, it's a legal construct.

And to be honest I'm not sure how that applies WRT the OP.

[Snake Alchemist]

8. It's pretty clear it's unconstitutional. They are taking white-collar jobs so it's obvious.

If they were taking blue-collar jobs then it would be different.

[flexnor]

9. The majority of Americans were AGAINST NAFTA

i always hear in the H-1b debate 'but white collar workers didnt care about blue collar workers'

but i have yet to ever hear any proof of it

and like i said most citizens were against NAFTA< they werent stupid

[LiberalEsto]

12. And those that supported NAFTA

were sold on the argument that it would keep illegal immigrants from flowing into the U.S. from Mexico, because it would provide jobs for them in their own country.

That argument was utter nonsense, because it certainly didn't cut down on illegal immigration. Instead, it increased the flow of American blue-collar jobs from our country to Mexico.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

15. People aren't illegal.

[flexnor]

18. Perot said the exact opposite, that NAFTA would increase illegal immigration

becasue local ag would be devestated

and he was right, and i voted for him

[Snake Alchemist]

16. Many will say things like "people aren't illegal" or "they were here millenia before the US"

if you even hint that illegal immigrants take jobs and drive down blue-collar wages. H1B visas are somehow immune to this argument though.

[LiberalEsto]

10. K&R for all the unemployed American IT workers

However, I doubt this Supreme Court will issue a favorable ruling, if it even accepts this suit.

My husband's brother has been unemployed or underemployed for many years because he can't get work in the IT field. He would be homeless, if he weren't able to live with another brother.