Ninth Circuit Ruling a Win for Undocumented Workers

Court Rules Defendants in Employment Discrimination Lawsuit Cannot Collect Information About Plaintiffs' Immigration Status

SAN FRANCISCO, Calif., April 13 -- In a precedent-setting opinion with nationwide ramifications, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled today that 23 immigrant workers who filed civil rights claims against their employer could not be forced to submit to defense inquiries regarding their immigration status. The ruling in Rivera et al. v. NIBCO, Inc. affirms a lower federal court order that protected the plaintiffs in this case - former employees who allege discrimination based on their national origin and language - from such inquiries.

"The Ninth Circuit's decision is of major importance to all workers who seek to enforce their legal rights against unlawful employment practices," said Christopher Ho, senior staff attorney with the Legal Aid Society - Employment Law Center and lead counsel for the Rivera plaintiffs. "The Court understood that the oppressive threat of deportation cannot be used by employers to defeat the enforcement of this nation's employment laws - laws that protect documented and undocumented persons alike."

The Rivera case, an employment discrimination action filed by Latina and Southeast Asian former employees at an irrigation manufacturing facility in Fresno, California, alleged that the plaintiffs had been terminated due to their failure to pass a written examination administered entirely in English, even though the examination was unrelated to the job and the plaintiffs had performed their jobs adequately for years.

During discovery, NIBCO's attorneys repeatedly sought to inquire about the plaintiffs' immigration status. After the district court in Fresno denied their request three times, NIBCO appealed to the Ninth Circuit, arguing that U.S. Supreme Court's 2002 decision in Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. NLRB permitted such invasive discovery.

In today's decision, the Ninth Circuit rejected NIBCO's claim that it was entitled to this information, observing that "the chilling effect that the disclosure of plaintiffs' immigration status could have upon their ability to effectuate their rights . . . outweighed NIBCO's interests in obtaining the information." Were such discovery to be permitted, "countless acts of illegal and reprehensible conduct would go unreported."

The Court further noted that accepting NIBCO's claim as valid would "unacceptably burden[ ]" the public interest in the vigorous enforcement of federal workplace and civil rights laws.

Marielena Hincapie, Program Director with the National Immigration Law Center, co-counsel for the Rivera plaintiffs, said, "Today's decision is an enormous step forward for immigrant workers everywhere. It means that those who fear retaliation because they have had the determination to assert their legal rights may now do so with less concern that deportation will be the only consequence of their courage."

The Rivera plaintiffs are also represented by the Asian Law Caucus, the Law Offices of Richtel & Smith, and the Law Offices of Minami, Lew & Tamaki. A link to today's opinion in Rivera (Case No. 02-16532) may be found at:

http://pub.bna.com/lw/0216532.pdf

or by going to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals website: (http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/) - click on Opinions - click on Opinions by Date - 2004 - April - 4/13/04 - click on Rivera v. NIBCO)

back to Media and Publications Archive