Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, a Delaware limited liability partnership | This website contains attorney advertising.
February 05, 2009

Resolution of Social Security No-Match Lawsuit Delayed Again

As President Barack Obama begins his term in office, a number of worksite enforcement issues are in the spotlight.

One of the longest-pending issues is litigation involving the Department of Homeland Security's Safe-Harbor Procedures for Employers Who Receive a No-Match Letter from the Social Security Administration. This litigation involves a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) final rule issued in August 2007, which was challenged in federal court before it went into effect. The rule has been subject to a preliminary injunction while the lawsuit is pending.

On January 20, the White House issued a memo directing federal agency heads to consider delaying implementation of certain regulations to provide the new administration with an opportunity to review them. Along with a number of others, DHShas selected the No-Match rule for review.

When Obama took office in January, DHS was due to file its next briefs with the federal court in the Northern District of California on February 9. On January 29, DHS filed a motion requesting a 60-day extension to provide the new administration an opportunity to analyze and review the regulation. The court granted the motion on February 3, and DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano now has until April 10 to decide whether to support the previous administration's rule.

The material contained in this communication is informational, general in nature and does not constitute legal advice. The material contained in this communication should not be relied upon or used without consulting a lawyer to consider your specific circumstances. This communication was published on the date specified and may not include any changes in the topics, laws, rules or regulations covered. Receipt of this communication does not establish an attorney-client relationship. In some jurisdictions, this communication may be considered attorney advertising.