## Facts

- Collins Foods International, Inc. operated a Sizzler restaurant in Phoenix where a manager, Ricardo Soto Gomez, had hiring authority.
- Soto offered Armando Rodriguez a job after a telephone conversation; Rodriguez was then working at another Sizzler location in California and gave no indication he lacked work authorization.
- When Rodriguez arrived to start work in Phoenix, Soto requested proof of identity and work authorization and refused to let Rodriguez begin working when he initially lacked the required documents.
- Rodriguez later presented a driver’s license and a Social Security card that appeared genuine on their face; Soto reviewed the face of the documents and completed Form I‑9 using the copied information.
- Soto did not examine the back of the Social Security card or compare it to an agency handbook example.
- The Social Security card was later determined to be a forgery and Rodriguez was unauthorized for U.S. employment.
- The INS issued a notice of intent to fine, and an ALJ found Collins liable for “knowingly” hiring based on constructive knowledge and imposed a civil penalty.

## Issues

1. Whether an employer that follows IRCA’s I‑9 process by examining documents that reasonably appear genuine on their face can be found to have “knowingly” hired an unauthorized alien under 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(a)(1)(A) based on constructive knowledge from failing to detect a forgery or investigate beyond the documents’ face.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit reversed the ALJ’s finding of liability and set aside the civil penalty.
- The court held Collins Foods did not “knowingly” hire an unauthorized alien within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(a)(1)(A).
- The court concluded the INS did not rebut the statutory presumption favoring an employer who inspects documents that reasonably appear genuine on their face and relate to the employee.

## Legal Principles

- Under IRCA, an employer violates 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(a)(1)(A) only if it hires an alien knowing the alien is unauthorized to work.
- IRCA’s verification scheme requires completion of Form I‑9 and examination of documents that reasonably appear on their face to be genuine and to relate to the employee; compliance supports a presumption against “knowing” hiring, rebuttable by the government.
- “Knowing” hiring is not established merely because an employer fails to detect a nonobvious forgery or fails to conduct additional investigation beyond a reasonable facial review when the documents are not facially deficient.
- The statutory scheme does not require employers to act as document specialists absent obvious irregularities or other facts indicating unauthorized status.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit held that an employer who timely requires I‑9 documentation and relies on documents that reasonably appear genuine on their face does not “knowingly” hire an unauthorized alien based solely on constructive knowledge from failing to uncover a forgery, and it vacated the administrative penalty.


Collins Foods Int’l, Inc. v. INS, 948 F.2d 549 (9th Cir. 1991)