The risks to businesses in current immigration enforcement!

Immigration Compliance for Businesses: Navigating DHS-ICE Operations, Harboring Laws, and Terrorist Support Risks

As an immigration lawyer advising businesses, I frequently encounter concerns about compliance with federal and state laws governing interactions with individuals who may be undocumented or linked to organizations designated as terrorist groups. Recent developments involving the Trump administration’s use of advanced data systems, such as Palantir’s ImmigrationOS and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), have heightened scrutiny on businesses, non-profits, and individuals providing services to such individuals. This blog post provides a detailed overview of the current landscape, outlines potential penalties for violating harboring or terrorist support laws, highlights real-world examples of enforcement, and offers practical guidance for businesses to mitigate legal risks while providing essential services.

Current Administration Efforts to Access Immigration Databases

The Trump administration has significantly expanded efforts to streamline immigration enforcement through advanced data integration. The Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has partnered with Palantir Technologies to develop the Immigration Lifecycle Operating System (ImmigrationOS), a $30 million platform designed to provide “near real-time visibility” into self-deportations and enhance targeting for removal operations. ImmigrationOS aggregates biographical, biometric, and geolocation data from multiple federal databases, including those managed by the Social Security Administration (SSA), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and others. It also integrates with ICE’s Alien Tracker (ATrac) system, which uses geospatial interfaces to assign field teams to apprehend targets.

The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk, is reportedly creating a “cross-agency master database” that includes sensitive personal information such as Social Security records, IRS filings, Medicare data, and voting histories. This database, allegedly built with Palantir’s assistance, aims to centralize data for enforcement programs like ImmigrationOS, often without clear statutory authority. These efforts prioritize individuals with final orders of removal, visa overstays, and those suspected of ties to transnational criminal organizations, such as MS-13 or Tren de Aragua, which have been designated as terrorist groups under recent executive orders.

This data-driven approach enables ICE to conduct large-scale operations, including workplace raids and targeted apprehensions, with unprecedented efficiency. For businesses, this means heightened risks of audits, raids, or investigations if they are found to be employing or serving individuals flagged in these systems.

Penalties for Harboring Illegal Aliens or Supporting Terrorist Organizations

Harboring Illegal Aliens

Under federal law, specifically 8 U.S.C. § 1324, it is a crime to knowingly harbor, conceal, or shield an undocumented immigrant from detection, or to encourage or induce their unlawful entry or residence in the U.S. Penalties include:

• Criminal Penalties: Up to 7 years in prison per alien harbored, or up to 10 years if the offense was for commercial gain or caused serious bodily injury. If the harboring results in death, penalties can escalate to life imprisonment.
• Civil  Penalties: Fines up to $5,000 per violation, with additional penalties for pattern-or-practice violations under the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA).
• Asset Forfeiture: Property used to facilitate harboring may be seized.

State laws also impose penalties. For example, Texas’s Senate Bill 4 (SB4) allows state authorities to arrest and deport individuals suspected of illegal entry, and it criminalizes harboring with penalties mirroring federal law. Other states, like Arizona and Florida, have similar statutes, though enforcement varies.

Providing Material Support to Terrorist Organizations

Under 18 U.S.C. § 2339A and § 2339B, providing “material support” to designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) or Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGTs) is a federal crime. The designation of cartels like the Sinaloa Cartel and Tren de Aragua as FTOs under recent executive orders expands the scope of these laws. Material support includes providing tangible or intangible aid, such as money, services, lodging, or personnel, with knowledge that the recipient is a designated terrorist or intends to commit terrorist acts. Penalties include:

• Criminal Penalties: Up to 20 years in prison, or life imprisonment if the support results in death.
• Civil Penalties: Fines up to $250,000 per violation, with potential civil lawsuits by victims of terrorism.
• Asset Forfeiture: Seizure of assets linked to the support.

The broad definition of “material support” can encompass routine business transactions if the recipient is later identified as a terrorist affiliate, posing significant risks for businesses unaware of a client’s status.

Case Studies of Enforcement Actions

Harboring Illegal Aliens

1. Mississippi Poultry Plant Raids (2019): ICE conducted the largest single-day workplace raid in U.S. history, arresting 680 undocumented workers at seven Mississippi poultry processing plants. The raids, enabled by Palantir’s software, targeted employers suspected of knowingly hiring undocumented workers. While most workers faced deportation, plant managers were charged under 8 U.S.C. § 1324 for harboring, facing fines and up to 7 years in prison. The case highlighted the role of Palantir’s Investigative Case Management (ICM) system in identifying targets.
2. Texas Electronics Repair Company (2019): In Allen, Texas, ICE arrested 280  workers at a company suspected of employing undocumented immigrants. The employer faced civil fines for IRCA violations and criminal charges for harboring after evidence showed they ignored falsified I-9 forms. The operation relied on Palantir’s ICM to cross-reference employee data with immigration records.
3. Individual Case: Lydia Dominguez (2021): In California, a landlord was charged under state law for knowingly renting apartments to undocumented tenants and failing to report their status. Dominguez faced fines and probation, illustrating how state laws can target individuals beyond employers.

Material Support to Terrorist Organizations

1. Holy Land Foundation (2008): This Texas-based non-profit was convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 2339B for providing over $12 million to Hamas, a designated FTO. Leaders faced up to 65 years in prison, and the organization’s assets were seized. While not directly related to cartels, this case demonstrates the severe consequences for non-profits providing      aid to designated groups.
2. Individual Case: Cholo Abdi Abdullah (2020): Abdullah, a U.S. citizen, was sentenced to 23 years for providing material support to al-Shabaab by attempting to join the group and offering logistical advice. This case underscores how even indirect support to FTOs can lead to lengthy prison terms.
3. Hypothetical Cartel Case: While no public cases yet involve businesses charged for supporting newly designated cartels, a 2025 ICE operation targeting Tren de Aragua affiliates in New York reportedly used Palantir’s ImmigrationOS to identify businesses (e.g., bodegas) suspected of providing services to gang members. Charges are pending, but this illustrates emerging risks.

Best Practices for Businesses Providing Services

Businesses, non-profits, and service providers must navigate a complex legal landscape to avoid liability while serving diverse communities. The following best practices are tailored to different types of entities, with specific guidance on identification requirements and handling suspected undocumented individuals or terrorist affiliates.

General Compliance Strategies

1. Implement Robust I-9 and E-Verify Processes:
   • For employers, comply with IRCA by completing Form I-9 for all employees within three days of hire. Use E-Verify to confirm work authorization, especially in states like Arizona and Georgia where it is mandatory.
   • Train HR staff to recognize valid identification documents, such as Social Security cards, driver’s licenses, or Employment Authorization Documents (EADs). An Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) is not acceptable for I-9 purposes, as it is issued for tax filing and does not confer work authorization.

2.   Know Your Customer (KYC) Protocols:

• Banks, hospitals, and other regulated entities should adopt KYC protocols to verify client identities. Acceptable IDs include U.S. driver’s licenses, passports, or state-issued IDs. ITINs may be used for tax purposes (e.g. opening bank accounts), but they do not confirm immigration status.
• For non-regulated businesses (e.g., gas stations, retail), requesting ID is not typically required unless mandated by state law or specific transactions (e.g., alcohol sales). However, maintaining transaction records can demonstrate due diligence.

3.   Train Staff on Legal Boundaries:

• Educate employees on federal and state laws prohibiting harboring (8 U.S.C. § 1324) and material support (18 U.S.C. § 2339A/B). Emphasize that knowingly providing shelter, employment, or services to undocumented individuals or terrorist affiliates can trigger liability.
• Provide clear protocols for escalating concerns about a client’s status to management or legal counsel without violating anti-discrimination laws.

4.   Engage Legal Counsel:

• Retain an immigration attorney to conduct periodic compliance audits and advise on state-specific laws, such as Texas SB4 or Florida’s anti-harboring statutes.
• Develop a response plan for ICE audits or raids, including designating a point person to interact with agents and protect employee rights.

Handling Suspected Undocumented Individuals

If a business suspects a client or employee is undocumented (e.g., they present an ITIN instead of a Social Security number or lack valid ID):

• Do Not Report Unless Required: Federal law does not mandate businesses to report suspected undocumented individuals to ICE, except in specific contexts (e.g., government contractors). However, some state laws, like Texas SB4, may impose reporting duties for certain entities (e.g., schools or hospitals). Consult legal counsel to confirm obligations.
• Verify Employment Eligibility: For employees, ensure I-9 compliance. If an employee presents an ITIN or no valid work authorization, terminate employment promptly to avoid harboring charges, but follow fair labor practices to avoid discrimination claims.
• Provide Services Neutrally: For non-employment services (e.g., healthcare, banking), provide services unless you have credible evidence of illegal activity (e.g., fraud). Refusing service based solely on suspected immigration status risks violating anti-discrimination laws, such as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act or state equivalents.
• Document Interactions: Maintain records of IDs presented and services provided. This can demonstrate compliance if audited by ICE or state authorities.

Handling Suspected Terrorist Affiliates (e.g., Cartel Members)

If a business suspects a client or employee is linked to a designated FTO, such as a cartel:

• Check OFAC Lists: The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) maintains a  Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list, which includes FTOs and affiliates. Banks and regulated entities must screen clients against this list. Non-regulated businesses (e.g., clinics, schools) are not required to screen but should consider doing so for high-risk transactions.
• Cease Transactions: If a client is confirmed to be on the SDN list or credibly linked to an FTO, immediately cease providing services.      Continuing to provide even routine services (e.g., medical care, banking) could be construed as material support under 18 U.S.C. § 2339B.
• Report to Authorities: Contact the FBI or Department of Treasury’s FinCEN (for financial institutions) to report suspected terrorist activity. Use the Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) process for banks. Non-regulated entities should consult legal counsel before reporting to avoid defamation or privacy violations.
• Avoid Public Disclosure: Do not publicly accuse or label someone as a terrorist affiliate without evidence, as this could lead to defamation lawsuits.

Identification Requirements by Sector

• Banks: Require a government-issued ID (e.g., passport, driver’s license) or ITIN for account opening. Screen against OFAC’s SDN list. ITINs are acceptable for tax purposes but do not confirm immigration status.
• Hospitals/Clinics: Under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), hospitals must provide emergency care regardless of immigration status. Request ID for billing purposes (e.g., ITIN, passport), but do not deny care based on lack of ID. Screen for FTO affiliations only if credible evidence exists.
• Schools: Public schools are prohibited from denying enrollment based on immigration status under Plyler v. Doe (1982). Request proof of residency (e.g., utility bill) rather than immigration documents. ITINs may be used for tax-related forms but are not required.
• Gas Stations/Retail: No ID is typically required unless mandated by law (e.g., age-restricted sales). Requesting ID to verify immigration status is unnecessary and risks discrimination claims.

Ohio Identification Requirements

In Ohio, businesses are generally subject to federal immigration laws, such as the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), but the state has not enacted stringent state-specific identification or immigration enforcement laws comparable to those in Florida or Texas. Ohio’s approach to immigration compliance focuses on cooperation with federal authorities rather than imposing additional state-level mandates on businesses. Key requirements include:

• Employment Verification: Ohio employers must comply with IRCA by completing Form I-9 for all employees, using valid identification such as a Social Security card, U.S. passport, or Employment Authorization Document (EAD). Unlike some states, Ohio does not mandate E-Verify for private employers, though public employers and contractors may be required to use it under specific state contracts. An ITIN is not acceptable for I-9 purposes.
• Banking: Banks in Ohio follow federal KYC regulations, requiring a government-issued ID (e.g., driver’s license, passport) or ITIN for      account opening. ITINs are acceptable for tax purposes but do not verify immigration status. Banks must screen clients against the OFAC SDN list to avoid transactions with FTO affiliates.
• Healthcare: Hospitals and clinics must provide emergency care under EMTALA, regardless of immigration status. Ohio law does not require hospitals to collect immigration status data, unlike Florida’s SB 1718. IDs (e.g., ITIN, passport) may be requested for billing but are not mandatory for care.
• Schools: Ohio public schools comply with Plyler v. Doe, enrolling students regardless of immigration status. Schools typically request proof of residency (e.g., utility bill) rather than immigration documents. ITINs may be used for tax-related forms but are not required.
• Retail/Gas Stations: No state-specific ID requirements exist for routine transactions, except for age-restricted sales (e.g., alcohol, tobacco). Requesting ID to verify immigration status is not mandated and could risk discrimination claims.
• State Cooperation with ICE: Under Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, some Ohio local law enforcement agencies collaborate with ICE to identify and detain noncitizens with criminal charges. Businesses are not required to report suspected undocumented individuals unless subject to specific federal contracts.

Ohio’s lack of aggressive state-level immigration laws reduces compliance burdens for businesses compared to states like Florida. However, businesses must still adhere to federal laws and be prepared for ICE audits, particularly in sectors like manufacturing, where undocumented workers have historically been targeted (e.g., the 2018 ICE raid on a meatpacking plant in Salem, Ohio, arresting 146 workers).

Florida Identification Requirements Under Recent Laws and DeSantis’ Enforcement Programs

Florida, under Governor Ron DeSantis, has implemented some of the nation’s most stringent immigration laws, particularly through Senate Bill 1718 (2023), Senate Bill 2-C, and Senate Bill 4-C (both signed February 13, 2025). These laws, combined with DeSantis’ enforcement programs, impose significant identification and compliance requirements on businesses. Key requirements include:

• Employment Verification: SB 1718 mandates E-Verify for private employers with 25 or more employees, effective July 1, 2023. Employers must verify work authorization using E-Verify, accepting only valid IDs like Social Security cards, U.S. passports, or EADs. ITINs are not acceptable for I-9 or E-Verify purposes. Penalties for non-compliance include fines of $1,000  per day per violation after three violations within two years, potential license suspension, and repayment of economic development incentives.
• Banking:  Banks must follow federal KYC rules, requiring government-issued IDs (e.g., driver’s license, passport) or ITINs for account opening. SB 1718 prohibits counties and municipalities from funding organizations that issue IDs to undocumented individuals, effectively banning community ID programs. Banks must screen against the OFAC SDN list. A proposed 2025 law requires licensees to verify the identity of senders of foreign remittance transfers, potentially increasing scrutiny on transactions involving ITINs.
• Healthcare: SB 1718 requires hospitals accepting Medicaid or CHIP funding to include a question on admission forms about a patient’s immigration status (U.S. citizen, lawfully present, or not lawfully present) and submit quarterly reports to the Agency for Health Care Administration on costs of care for undocumented patients. Patients must be informed that their response will not affect care or result in an ICE report. IDs (e.g., ITIN, passport) may be requested for billing but are not mandatory for emergency care under EMTALA.
• Schools: Florida schools must comply with Plyler v. Doe, but SB 2-C (2025) eliminates in-state tuition eligibility for undocumented students at public colleges and universities, effective July 1, 2025. Schools request proof of residency (e.g., utility bill) rather than immigration documents. ITINs may be used for tax-related forms. A proposed 2025 law makes voting by undocumented immigrants a third-degree felony, potentially increasing  scrutiny on student voter registration.
• Retail/Gas Stations: No ID is required for routine transactions unless mandated  (e.g., alcohol sales). SB 1718 invalidates driver’s licenses issued to undocumented individuals by other states, meaning businesses cannot accept such IDs for transactions requiring proof of identity (e.g., check cashing). Requesting ID to verify immigration status is not required but could risk discrimination claims if applied inconsistently.
• DeSantis’ Enforcement Programs: DeSantis has expanded state-led immigration  enforcement through Memoranda of Agreement under Section 287(g), training Florida Highway Patrol, Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE), Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), Florida State  Guard, and Department of Agricultural Law Enforcement to perform ICE  functions. A new State Board of Immigration Enforcement, created by SB 2-C  and SB 4-C, coordinates with federal officials and allocates $298 million      for hiring, training, and bonuses for officers assisting ICE. Businesses may face increased audits, as state agencies can conduct random checks for E-Verify compliance. SB 4-C imposes a mandatory death penalty for undocumented immigrants convicted of capital felonies (e.g., first-degree murder), heightening risks for businesses employing such individuals.
• Transportation Restrictions: SB 1718 makes it a felony to knowingly transport  undocumented individuals into Florida, with third-degree felony charges for transporting one person and second-degree felony charges for transporting a minor or more than five people. Businesses (e.g., gas stations, motels) serving suspected undocumented travelers must exercise caution to avoid aiding such transport.

Florida’s laws significantly increase compliance burdens, particularly for employers and hospitals. Businesses must integrate E-Verify, avoid accepting invalid IDs, and be prepared for state-led audits. DeSantis’ 287(g) agreements and the State Board of Immigration Enforcement amplify risks of workplace raids and investigations, especially for industries like agriculture, construction, and hospitality, which rely heavily on immigrant labor.

Legal Risks of Refusing Service

Refusing service to someone based on suspected illegal immigration status or terrorist affiliation carries legal risks:

• Anti-Discrimination Laws: Refusing service based on national origin, race, or perceived immigration status may violate federal laws (e.g., Title VI, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d) or state anti-discrimination statutes. For example, a gas station      refusing service to someone with an ITIN could face a lawsuit if the refusal is deemed discriminatory.
• Defamation: Publicly accusing someone of being a cartel member or terrorist without evidence could lead to defamation claims, especially if the accusation harms their reputation.
• Due Process Violations: Schools or hospitals refusing service to suspected undocumented individuals or their families may violate constitutional protections, particularly for U.S. citizen children of undocumented parents.

To mitigate these risks, base refusals on objective criteria (e.g., failure to provide required ID for a regulated transaction) rather than assumptions about status. Document the reason for refusal and consult legal counsel.

Hypothetical Scenarios and Responses

1. Scenario:  A hospital treats a patient who presents an ITIN and no Social Security number.
   • Action:  Provide emergency care per EMTALA. Request ID for billing but do not deny  care. If the patient is suspected of FTO ties (e.g., on the SDN list), report to the FBI after treatment and cease non-emergency services.
   • Risk:  Minimal, as EMTALA mandates care. However, failure to screen for FTO affiliations in non-emergency contexts could risk material support charges.

1. Scenario: A small business (e.g., bodega) suspects a customer is a Tren de Aragua member based on local rumors.
   • Action: Continue routine transactions unless credible evidence (e.g., SDN listing) confirms FTO status. Do not report to ICE based on rumors, as this could lead to defamation or discrimination claims. Consult legal counsel if evidence emerges.
   • Risk: Providing routine services without knowledge of FTO status is unlikely to trigger liability. However, ignoring credible evidence could lead to material support charges.

1. Scenario: A school enrolls a child whose parent presents an ITIN and is suspected of being undocumented.
   • Action: Enroll the child per Plyler v. Doe. Request proof of residency, not immigration status. Do not report to ICE unless required by state law (e.g., Texas SB4). If the parent is suspected of FTO ties, report to the FBI only with evidence.
   • Risk: Denying enrollment risks constitutional violations. Reporting without  evidence risks discrimination claims.

Conclusion

The Trump administration’s use of Palantir’s ImmigrationOS and DOGE’s master database has intensified immigration enforcement, placing businesses, non-profits, and service providers in a precarious position. Federal and state laws on harboring and material support to terrorist organizations carry severe penalties, as seen in cases like the Mississippi poultry raids and the Holy Land Foundation prosecution. In Ohio, businesses face fewer state-specific requirements but must comply with federal laws and prepare for ICE audits. In Florida, SB 1718, SB 2-C, SB 4-C, and DeSantis’ enforcement programs impose rigorous E-Verify, ID, and reporting mandates, particularly for employers and hospitals. To navigate this landscape, businesses must adopt robust compliance programs, including I-9 verification, KYC protocols, and staff training. When serving suspected undocumented individuals or terrorist affiliates, prioritize objective criteria, document interactions, and consult legal counsel to balance compliance with anti-discrimination obligations.

For tailored advice, contact an immigration attorney to review your business’s specific risks and obligations. Staying informed and proactive is the best defense against legal and reputational harm in this evolving enforcement environment.