An unexpected visit from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) can be disruptive and stressful. Employers who prepare in advance—and respond carefully—can protect their businesses, avoid unnecessary liability, and maintain order during a difficult situation.

ICE has raised the stakes for I-9 audits.  New rules have changed some technical violations of Form I-9 to substantive violations.  The distinction is significant: Technical violations may be cured within ten days, but substantive violations may not be cured after receiving a Notice of Inspection.  Substantive violations carry a penalty of approximately $300 to $3,000 per violation. 

Preparation is your first line of defense. Employers should periodically audit their I‑9 forms with legal counsel to confirm compliance and demonstrate good‑faith efforts. Clear policies should distinguish public areas (such as reception areas) from non‑public workspaces and be supported by visible signage. Equally important: Designate a trained management‑level point of contact who is authorized to speak with government agents. All other employees should know to immediately route agents to that person.

Notify Oregon and Washington employees before an I-9 inspection.  If you learn that federal officials may conduct an I-9 inspection, let your employees know immediately (in Oregon, it must be within three days of learning of the inspection; in Washington, within five days).  Oregon employers must post a notice in a conspicuous place (typically where other mandatory notice postings are located); a model form and more information are available here.

If ICE arrives, stay calm and limit engagement. ICE agents may lawfully enter areas open to the public, but access to non‑public areas typically requires a judicial search warrant, unless an authorized company representative gives consent.  ICE agents may ask for such consent of anyone they can find; employees without authority should state plainly that they cannot consent on the company’s behalf and point them to the individual authorized to act for the company.  That person can decline or permit a search.  If agents issue a direct order, comply, even if you think the order is unjustified or unlawful—but make clear you are doing so without consenting.

Warrants. ICE agents may present an arrest warrant or a search warrant. Employers should request a copy of any warrant and avoid debating its scope on site. Issues can be addressed later with counsel.

Do not obstruct—but do not over‑volunteer. Never interfere with ICE operations, hide or destroy records, or assist anyone in fleeing. Employees may choose whether to answer questions, but any statements made must be truthful.

After ICE leaves, document and follow up. Record what occurred, notify leadership, contact legal counsel, and communicate with employees to address concerns.

A calm, prepared, and legally grounded response helps employers navigate ICE visits without making a difficult situation worse.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Adam Belzberg Adam Belzberg

Adam Belzberg represents and advises employers, from small businesses to international corporations, in all aspects of labor and employment law. He has particular experience representing employers in the agriculture, construction, and energy industries. Adam’s litigation experience includes class action and individual litigation arising…

Adam Belzberg represents and advises employers, from small businesses to international corporations, in all aspects of labor and employment law. He has particular experience representing employers in the agriculture, construction, and energy industries. Adam’s litigation experience includes class action and individual litigation arising under various state and federal employment laws. He also provides daily advice and counsel to employers on employment issues including employment policies, non-compete, non-solicitation, and trade secret issues and regularly represents management before the NLRB in cases involving union representation and unfair labor practices, negotiating collective bargaining agreements, and arbitrating labor and employment disputes.

Click here for Adam Belzberg’s full bio.

Photo of Ryan Kunkel Ryan Kunkel

Ryan Kunkel is a trial lawyer who litigates employment-related disputes in federal and state court and private arbitration, and counsels employers to help mitigate risk and prevent disputes from reaching litigation in the first place. Ryan specializes in pursuing and defending cases involving…

Ryan Kunkel is a trial lawyer who litigates employment-related disputes in federal and state court and private arbitration, and counsels employers to help mitigate risk and prevent disputes from reaching litigation in the first place. Ryan specializes in pursuing and defending cases involving unfair competition, such as employee non-competition, non-solicitation, and trade secret obligations, especially in the financial and manufacturing industries. His practice also includes litigating before the National Labor Relations Board, arbitrating labor grievances, and helping management navigate and resolve complex labor disputes, including organizing drives and work stoppages.

Click here for Ryan Kunkel’s full bio.