Bill Description: House Bill 584 would require all employers to implement and use the federal e-verify system and impose severe penalties for violations.
Rating: 0
NOTE: Both House Bill 584 and Senate Bill 1247 (2026) would require the use of the federal e-verify system, but Senate Bill 1247 would limit the mandate to government entities and most private employers who do business with government entities. House Bill 584 would impose the mandate on all employers (including small businesses) and impose much harsher penalties for violations.
Does it give government any new, additional, or expanded power to prohibit, restrict, or regulate activities in the free market? Conversely, does it eliminate or reduce government intervention in the market?
House Bill 584 would create Chapter 3, Title 44, Idaho Code, to require all employers to implement and use the federal e-verify system, and to provide definitions, mandates, and penalties related to the system.
The mandate would apply to “any individual, person, corporation, department, board, bureau, agency, commission, division, office, company, firm, partnership, council, or committee of the state government, public benefit corporation, public authority, political subdivision of the state, or other business entity that employs or seeks to employ an individual or individuals and that registers with the secretary of state.”
The only exceptions would be for “the relationship between a party and the employees of an independent contractor performing work for the party” and “casual domestic labor performed within a household.” No exceptions for small businesses, non-profits, or religious organizations are included in this bill.
The bill would make it unlawful “for any employer to knowingly employ, hire, recruit, or refer, either for the employer itself or on behalf of another, for private or public employment within the state an unauthorized worker who is not duly authorized to be employed by law.”
It would also say, “No business entity, employer, or public employer may knowingly employ, hire for employment, or continue to employ an unauthorized alien to perform work within the state of Idaho.” This language would apply the bill to existing employees, not just new hires.
The bill would require all employers to “verify an employee's legal status or authorization to work after employing the individual within the first three (3) days after the employee's first day of work for pay has elapsed or by no later than the first day of work for pay if the employee will work for fewer than three (3) days.”
The bill says “every business entity and employer in this state shall enroll in the e-verify program and shall thereafter, according to the federal statutes and regulations governing e-verify, verify the employment eligibility of new hires through e-verify.”
It further states that “compliance with this section may be verified by state authorities or law enforcement at any time.”
The enforcement provisions of the bill are broad, allowing the attorney general to “bring a civil complaint in any court of competent jurisdiction to enforce the requirements of this chapter.”
The bill would also allow “any resident of this state” to “petition the attorney general to bring an enforcement action against a specific business entity or employer by means of a written, signed petition” that includes “an allegation that describes the alleged violator or violators, as well as the action constituting the violation, and the date and location where the violation occurred.”
The bill says, “the attorney general shall respond to any petition under this subsection within sixty (60) days of receiving the petition, either by filing a civil complaint in a court of competent jurisdiction or by informing the petitioner in writing that the attorney general has determined that filing a civil complaint is not warranted.”
The penalties for a business found to be in violation of this law are severe.
A first violation by “any business entity or employer awarded a contract by the state” would result in the suspension of their business licenses and permits for up to 60 days. A second offense would result in the termination of the contract and the permanent revocation of the business licenses and permits of the business entity or employer.
Penalties are harsh even for employers that aren’t contracting with the government. A first violation would result in the suspension of their business licenses and permits for up to 10 days and trigger a 3-year “probationary period throughout the state” during which the employer “shall file quarterly reports with the attorney general of each new employee who is hired by the business entity or employer in the state.”
A second offense would result in the automatic and permanent revocation of the business licenses and permits “held by the business entity or employer specific to the business location where the unauthorized alien performed work.”
A third offense would result in the automatic and permanent suspension of “any business licenses and permits of the business entity or employer throughout the state.”
Of note, a single unverified employee is considered an offense regardless of how many employees a business may have legally verified.
The penalties contained in this bill are significantly harsher than those in Senate Bill 1247 (2026) and far more severe than those imposed on businesses for other reporting errors or paperwork violations.
(-1)
Does it promote the breakdown of the traditional family or the deconstruction of societal norms? Examples include promoting or incentivizing degeneracy, violating parental rights, and compromising the innocence of children. Conversely, does it protect or uphold the structure, tenets, and traditional values of Western society?
To the extent that House Bill 584 requires governmental entities to hire only American citizens and lawful immigrants, the bill is consistent with upholding traditional values.
It should be noted, however, that the penalties in this bill are all structured around terminating contracts and suspending licenses and permits, none of which directly apply to governments. So, if a government hires an unauthorized alien, it would be required to terminate the employment, but that’s essentially it. If a private employer did the same thing, it would face potentially ruinous consequences.
(+1)
Does it increase government redistribution of wealth? Examples include the use of tax policy or other incentives to reward specific interest groups, businesses, politicians, or government employees with special favors or perks; transfer payments; and hiring additional government employees. Conversely, does it decrease government redistribution of wealth?
Governments regulate immigration for many reasons, including its financial, political, and demographic implications. Even when undocumented immigrants work and pay taxes, their use of healthcare and education systems — federally required under EMTALA and Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982) — can place a strain on the taxpayers who ultimately subsidize these systems.
The state of Idaho requiring governments and employers to use the federal e-verify system is unlikely to meaningfully reduce overall immigration levels, but it could encourage some undocumented immigrants to choose to live in places other than Idaho.
(+1)
Does it violate the principles of federalism by increasing federal authority, yielding to federal blandishments, or incorporating changeable federal laws into Idaho statutes or rules? Examples include citing federal code without noting as it is written on a certain date, using state resources to enforce federal law, and refusing to support and uphold the tenth amendment. Conversely, does it restore or uphold the principles of federalism?
One of the more concerning elements of using e-verify is the loss of state sovereignty and the broad incorporation of federal laws, rules, and definitions into Idaho code.
The entire e-verify system is controlled by the federal government, and the act explicitly says the e-verify system must be used “according to the applicable federal rules and regulations.” And, like all government registries, the e-verify system is subject to errors, inaccuracies, and manipulation. But under this act, the state has no authority to override the system in such cases.
Many of the bill’s definitions incorporate federal code including “alien,” “e-verify,” “Federal work authorization program,” “lawful presence,” and “unauthorized worker.” The bill also says that to “‘knowingly employ, hire for employment, or continue to employ an unauthorized alien’ means the actions described in 8 U.S.C. 1324a.”
It also says, “In any court proceedings, the determination of whether an employee is an unauthorized alien shall be made by the federal government, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. 1373(c). The court shall consider only the federal government's determination when deciding whether an employee is an unauthorized alien.”
These definitions and references are not fixed and could be altered by the federal government at any time. Such incorporation is an incredibly broad abdication of state sovereignty.
(-1)
