Ramp Up of Employers-Focused Immigration Crackdowns Underway—What Employers Can Do to Prepare

06.20.2025

Reports on Sunday, June 15, 2025 indicated that immigration enforcement activities in large cities, including Los Angeles, will be increasing. Recent comments from Tom Homan, White House Executive Associate Director, Enforcement and Removal Operations, have signaled that the federal government will be ramping up its targeting of employers as a part of this next round of enforcement. These statements at first appeared to be at odds with other recent statements by the President, in which he appeared to be cooling off on enforcement actions related to the agricultural and hotel and leisure industries. However, after a brief suspension, raids in those industries have resumed as well. Given that multiple administrative officials are using similar language--that enforcement efforts were being “stepped up” -- it is likely that raids in California will increase, with a focus on urban areas.

What do employers need to know?

I-9 Audits

An I-9 audit will begin with a Notice of Inspection which may either be mailed or hand-delivered by agents of the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”). These notices will typically provide an employer with three (3) days to produce the requested documents, which may include I-9 documentation, payroll records, Social Security Administration correspondence, and other employment-related documentation. DHS will often seek to review these documents at the worksite or place of business. It is important that employers involve legal counsel in this process early, as the DHS will often allow short extensions and may agree to review documents in a location that is less disruptive  to day-to-day operations.

It is imperative for California employers to be aware of their legal obligations in the event of an I-9 audit. One such obligation under California law is that an employer is required to provide notice to employees of an I-9 audit within seventy-two (72) hours of receiving the initial notice. Therefore, as discussed further below, every employer should have a plan for dealing with immigration enforcement, as there are strict timelines to which all California employers must adhere.

Employers should expect a Notice of Inspection Results after an I-9 audit, which will include information on compliance, non-compliance, and potential fines. Employers must provide notice, under California law, to any affected employee identified in the inspection results.

Arrests and Seizures

Until recently, the primary enforcement actions seen in California during the current administration were the arrests of single, or small groups of, employees. Such arrests may be carried out in accordance with what is known as an Administrative Warrant, which will often be issued by the DHS. Such a warrant should contain the name of the individual who is sought for arrest and the basis for the arrest. In carrying out arrests pursuant to such warrants, federal agents may conduct a search of any area that is within the immediate control of the arrested individual – which may include a desk, an office, the individual’s pockets and bags, or any other area or property, whether locked or unlocked, which is within lunging range of the individual. While this search is meant to protect the safety of the agents carrying out the arrest, there is no prohibition on documents or other items being acquired as a part of that search. However, the search must take place as a part of the arrest and should not take place after the arrested individual has been removed from the area. The search should not extend beyond the area of the arrested individual’s immediate control as discussed above. Where searches do extend beyond those thresholds, an employer is well within their rights to object to the search but should never act to physically interfere with a federal agent or law enforcement personnel. Employers should note objections and document any items seized. If any member of an organization is asked to be interviewed or questioned concerning a law enforcement action, it is recommended that the employer consult with an attorney prior to agreeing to be interviewed or questioned by law enforcement personnel.

Government Agent Visits and Raids

Larger scale workplace visits will likely come in one of two manners: a raid or a random enforcement visit.

In the case of a raid, government agents will show up to the workplace in force and may or may not be accompanied by local law enforcement agencies. There should be no expectation of notice of a raid. A raid should be accompanied by what is known as a judicial warrant, which is signed by a federal judge. However, in recent weeks raids have also been conducted in collaboration with local law enforcement agencies on the basis of State-issued judicial warrants. Regardless of the type of judicial warrant, it is important to know what the scope of the permitted search of the workplace should be, as the search is limited to the addresses and items or areas outlined in the warrant.  The warrant should be reviewed carefully, and objections should be lodged where agents seek to collect documents or property that are not within the scope of the warrant. Again, no effort should be made to physically interfere with the law enforcement personnel. Rather, a verbal objection should be lodged and the items seized should be documented.

It is important to know that the workplace will almost certainly be shut down during the length of the raid, as the law enforcement personnel will want to gather all employees in central locations where they can be sorted by citizenship/immigration status. Employers that share space with other employers, such as those working on construction sites, should be aware that their employees will likely be pulled into any raids that occur on the jobsite regardless of who the initial target employer may be.

Additionally, random jobsite enforcement visits may also occur. These visits may or may not be accompanied by a warrant and are often carried out when agents happen to be in the area for other purposes or conducting area-specific sweeps.

It is important to be aware that agents may legally search only public areas as part of any visit or raid that is not carried out pursuant to a judicial warrant (administrative warrants do not allow for searches and seizures, only arrests and searches incident to that arrest as discussed above). Public areas are those that are generally open to non-employees, such as lobbies, public parking lots, public restrooms, and other similar areas. Employers should prioritize physically separating areas which may contain sensitive information from these public areas, and these areas should be explicitly marked as such (e.g., “employee access only”, etc.).

Ultimately, employers may be forced to make a business decision regarding how much their organization wishes to voluntarily cooperate with federal immigration agents. There are, of course, potential pitfalls and drawbacks to either approach, and employers should consult counsel before making this decision.

Employers should prepare an action plan to facilitate well-informed business decisions that are not made in the heat of the moment. Such a plan should include the identification of points of contact on jobsites, employee awareness trainings, the implementation of signage and access controls, and processes and policies that dictate the organization’s response to a government agency visit, raid, or audit. Employers should explicitly advise all employees not to physically interfere with law enforcement personnel. 

AALRR attorneys have advised California employers on policy decisions and procedures just like this for nearly 50 years. We would be happy to help you in preparing such a plan, or to answer any of your questions based on the specific goals and risks of your organization. Please feel free to contact the authors of this Alert or your AALRR attorney for assistance.

This AALRR publication is intended for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in reaching a conclusion in a particular area of law. Applicability of the legal principles discussed may differ substantially in individual situations. Receipt of this or any other AALRR publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. The Firm is not responsible for inadvertent errors that may occur in the publishing process.

© 2025 Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Ruud & Romo