Chamber of Commerce of United States v. Edmondson
594 F.3d 742 | Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit | 2010
What This Case Means for Subcontractors
Oklahoma's employment verification law required contractors to use a federal verification system and imposed penalties on businesses that hired unauthorized workers. The court blocked two of the three challenged provisions, finding they conflicted with federal immigration law. For construction subcontractors, this means some state-level employment verification requirements may not be enforceable, but you still need to verify worker eligibility using approved federal systems.
Key Takeaways
- •Section 7(C), which penalized employers for firing authorized workers while keeping unauthorized ones, is blocked—you cannot be punished under this provision
- •Section 9, requiring tax withholding verification for independent contractors, is blocked—you don't have to withhold taxes based on this state rule
- •Section 7(B), requiring use of the Basic Pilot Program for employee verification, was upheld on appeal—you must still use this federal system if you contract with Oklahoma public employers
Section 7(C) is expressly preempted and Section 9 is impliedly preempted.
Frequently Asked Question
Do I have to follow Oklahoma's employment verification rules as a subcontractor?
Partially. The court blocked two provisions, but Section 7(B) still requires you to use the federal Basic Pilot Program if you work on Oklahoma public projects. You don't have to follow the state's rules about firing workers or withholding contractor taxes. Always use the federal E-Verify system for employee verification to stay compliant.
Related Cases
Gall v. United States
Appellate courts must review all sentences under an abuse-of-discretion standard regardless of whether they fall inside or outside the Guidelines range, and cannot require extraordinary circumstances to justify sentences outside the range.
Piotrowski v. City of Houston
Municipal liability under § 1983 requires proof of official policy as the moving force; isolated employee misconduct insufficient, and equal protection claim time-barred.
Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena
Federal race-based classifications must be analyzed under strict scrutiny regardless of whether they benefit or burden minorities, and the Fifth Amendment's equal protection obligation equals the Fourteenth Amendment's.
Northeastern Florida Chapter of the Associated General Contractors of America v. City of Jacksonville
An association of contractors has standing to challenge a minority set-aside ordinance without proving any member would have won a contract absent the ordinance; the injury is denial of equal competitive opportunity, not loss of a specific contract.
In Re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc.
The Civil Commitment of Sexually Violent Predators Act is civil, not criminal, and does not violate due process even when applied to incompetent defendants.
Edwin P. Harrison, and United States of America, Party in Interest v. Westinghouse Savannah River Company
The Fourth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal, holding that the False Claims Act broadly reaches false statements made to obtain government contract approval, not just false payment claims themselves.