The United States has long toed the line between enforcing its immigration laws and importing the requisite amount of foreign labor needed to keep its economy running. The immigration balancing act took center stage following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, as much of the country demanded the government hole up its borders and expel illegal residents. While the public outcry focused primarily on ridding the nation of terrorists, factions of the private sector had economic reasons for demanding a crackdown. Generally, companies employing illegal aliens can minimize operating costs and underbid competitors that hire only legally documented workers. Higher labor costs handicap employers who play by the rules. Large scale employment of illegal aliens also drives down the average wages of legally documented employees. Until recently, employers and employees seeking redress have been limited in their legal options. Courts have held that both companies and employees lack standing and direct injury, preferring the government, rather than the private sector, to enforce its immigration laws. As a result, injured parties must air their concerns to the federal government and hope that eventually their grievances are taken seriously. . . .
