ICE Worksite Raids and Employer Preparedness

SCHEDULE A CONSULTATION

Last Updated: July 2026

An ICE worksite raid can begin without warning and expose an employer to immigration, employment, criminal, tax, operational, and reputational risks at the same time.

Federal agents may arrive with a judicial search warrant authorizing them to search company property, seize Forms I-9 and other records, copy electronic data, interview employees, and arrest identified individuals. Employers should understand the difference between a judicial warrant and an ICE administrative warrant, know when consent is being requested, and have a written response plan in place before agents arrive.

A poorly managed response can expand the scope of a search, expose privileged information, interrupt business operations, and create allegations of false statements, evidence destruction, retaliation, or obstruction.

ICE Worksite Raids at a Glance

When federal agents arrive at a workplace:

Remain calm and professional;
Contact designated company leadership and legal counsel immediately;
Ask for copies of all warrants, subpoenas, and other documents;
Determine whether agents have a judicial search warrant or only an administrative ICE warrant;
Do not provide consent unless specifically authorized to do so;
Do not obstruct agents executing a valid judicial warrant;
Assign company representatives to monitor the search when permitted;
Document where agents go and what they take;
Identify potentially privileged materials;
Do not destroy, conceal, alter, or relocate records;
Do not tell employees what to say; and
Preserve relevant documents and electronic information after agents leave.

What Is an ICE Worksite Raid?

An ICE worksite raid is an enforcement operation in which federal agents enter a workplace to execute one or more warrants, gather evidence, interview individuals, or make arrests.

A raid may involve:

ICE Homeland Security Investigations;
ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations;
The Department of Justice;
The Federal Bureau of Investigation;
Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation;
The Department of Labor;
The Social Security Administration;
State or local law-enforcement agencies; or
Other government agencies involved in the underlying investigation.

Worksite investigations may concern more than Form I-9 compliance. Depending on the allegations, investigators may be looking for evidence of knowing employment of unauthorized workers, identity theft, fraudulent documents, false statements, tax violations, harboring, labor exploitation, money laundering, or obstruction.

What Is the Difference Between a Form I-9 Audit and an ICE Raid?

A Form I-9 inspection is an administrative process that generally begins with a Notice of Inspection. An ICE raid is usually connected to a criminal investigation and may involve an immediate search, seizure of property, interviews, and arrests.

Issue	Form I-9 inspection	ICE worksite raid
How it begins	Notice of Inspection or administrative request	Judicial search or arrest warrant
Advance notice	Generally at least three business days to produce Forms I-9, subject to exceptions	Frequently no advance notice
Primary purpose	Review employer verification and recordkeeping compliance	Gather evidence, execute arrests, or investigate suspected crimes
Entry into nonpublic areas	Usually based on cooperation or an applicable legal demand	May be authorized by a judicial search warrant
Records involved	Forms I-9 and related employment records	Potentially paper records, computers, phones, email, payroll data, and other evidence
Employee interviews	May occur during or after the inspection	May occur immediately at the worksite
Property seizure	Not ordinarily part of a routine inspection	May be authorized by the warrant
Potential outcome	Compliance notice, warning, settlement, or civil penalties	Civil penalties, criminal charges, arrests, forfeiture, or other enforcement

A Form I-9 audit can develop into a criminal investigation when ICE believes the records or the employer’s response reveal knowing employment, false documents, identity offenses, false statements, obstruction, or a pattern or practice of violations.

Employers receiving an administrative inspection notice should review our separate guide to ICE Form I-9 audits and Notices of Inspection.

What Documents May ICE Present at a Workplace?

The employer’s authority and obligations depend on what document the agents present. The designated representative should request a copy and transmit it to counsel immediately.

Judicial search warrant

A judicial search warrant is signed by a federal judge or magistrate judge. It may authorize agents to enter the locations identified in the warrant and search for or seize specified evidence.

The employer should review:

The address and premises covered;
Any suites, buildings, vehicles, or off-site locations listed;
The date or execution deadline;
The judge’s or magistrate judge’s signature;
The offenses under investigation;
The categories of property agents may search for or seize; and
Any provisions addressing computers, phones, servers, or electronic data.

The company may raise questions or objections through counsel, but it should not physically interfere with agents executing a valid judicial warrant.

ICE administrative warrant

ICE may present an administrative immigration warrant, including Form I-200 or Form I-205. These documents are generally issued by immigration officers rather than federal judges.

An administrative warrant may provide authority for immigration officers to arrest the person identified in the document. Standing alone, it generally does not authorize agents to enter nonpublic areas of a business without consent or another applicable legal basis.

An employer should not physically interfere with an arrest, hide an employee, or provide false information. It may decline to consent to entry into nonpublic areas when agents lack judicial authority to enter those areas.

Arrest warrant issued by a court

Agents may have a judicial arrest warrant for a particular individual. Counsel should review whether the document was signed by a judge and what authority it provides.

An arrest warrant for a person is not necessarily a warrant to search the entire workplace for documents or other evidence.

Subpoena

A subpoena may require the employer to produce records or testimony by a stated deadline. It does not ordinarily authorize agents to conduct an immediate search of the company’s nonpublic areas.

The company should accept the subpoena, avoid making substantive statements, and have counsel evaluate its scope, deadline, objections, privilege issues, and preservation requirements.

Notice of Inspection

A Notice of Inspection generally requires the employer to produce Forms I-9 and related records after the applicable notice period. It is not a search warrant and ordinarily does not authorize an immediate search of nonpublic areas.

Consent

Agents may ask a manager, receptionist, security officer, or other employee for permission to enter or search.

Consent can provide authority the government might not otherwise possess. The company’s written plan should specify who, if anyone, is authorized to consent. Other employees should professionally explain that they do not have that authority.

What Should an Employer Do When ICE Arrives?

Contact counsel immediately

Reception or security should notify the company’s designated response team and legal counsel as soon as agents arrive.

Agents executing a judicial warrant generally do not have to wait for counsel before beginning the search. Counsel may still be able to communicate with the lead agent, review the warrant, identify privilege concerns, and advise company representatives during the operation.

Ask for copies of all documents

Request copies of:

Search warrants;
Arrest warrants;
Administrative immigration warrants;
Subpoenas;
Notices of Inspection;
Supporting attachments; and
Business cards for the lead agents.

Do not insist on receiving a sealed affidavit or other document the government is not legally required to provide at that time.

Review the scope of the warrant

Determine:

Which address or facility is covered;
Which areas agents may search;
What property or information may be seized;
Whether electronic devices or accounts are included; and
Whether the warrant covers related entities or additional locations.

Do not provide unnecessary consent

The company representative can state that the company will not obstruct agents but does not consent to any search beyond the authority provided by the warrant.

Silence or cooperation with a valid warrant should not be unnecessarily characterized as affirmative consent.

Assign company representatives to monitor the search

When permitted, assign a company representative to accompany each group of agents. The representative should take notes concerning:

Areas entered;
Files reviewed;
Documents copied;
Devices seized;
Employees interviewed;
Questions asked;
Objections raised; and
Any damage or operational interruption.

The representative should not interfere, argue with agents, or attempt to conceal evidence.

Preserve records

Do not delete emails, shut down systems to prevent access, destroy paper files, alter Forms I-9, remove devices, or direct employees to dispose of information.

Normal deletion and document-destruction processes may need to be suspended immediately.

Suggested Reception or Security Script

A receptionist or security employee can say:

I am not authorized to consent to entry into nonpublic areas or to a search of company property. I will immediately contact the company representative and legal counsel. May I please have a copy of any warrant, subpoena, or other document you have for the company?

If agents present a judicial search warrant and proceed, the employee should not physically block them. The employee should notify the response team and document what occurred.

What May Agents Search or Seize?

The warrant should identify the places that may be searched and the categories of evidence that may be seized.

Depending on its language, agents may be authorized to examine or take:

Forms I-9 and supporting documents;
Personnel and payroll records;
Hiring and termination records;
Tax and wage records;
Staffing-company or subcontractor agreements;
Computers, phones, servers, and storage devices;
Emails and electronic messages;
Security records and access logs;
Corporate and financial records;
Training and policy materials;
Identification documents; and
Other evidence relating to the offenses under investigation.

Agents should generally remain within the warrant’s scope. A warrant authorizing a search for particular records may nevertheless permit agents to open containers, cabinets, folders, or electronic locations where those records could reasonably be found.

At the end of the search, the company should request an inventory or receipt identifying property seized.

What If Agents Appear to Exceed the Warrant?

The company representative should not physically interfere. The representative or counsel may professionally state the objection and ask the lead agent to identify the authority for searching the disputed location or seizing the disputed item.

The representative should document:

The area searched;
The property reviewed or taken;
The time;
The agents involved;
The objection made; and
The agents’ response.

Counsel can evaluate available remedies after the immediate search is complete.

Electronic Devices and Company Data

Search warrants frequently authorize agents to seize computers, phones, storage devices, or copies of electronic accounts for later review.

The company’s IT representative should be prepared to:

Identify company-owned and personal devices;
Explain which systems perform essential operational functions;
Identify servers or accounts containing privileged material;
Preserve backups;
Document devices and credentials taken;
Request alternatives that reduce unnecessary business disruption; and
Protect unrelated regulated or confidential information where legally possible.

Employees should not delete, encrypt, remotely wipe, disconnect, conceal, or disable devices after learning of the search.

Questions about passwords, passcodes, encryption keys, or administrative credentials should be referred to counsel when circumstances permit. Employees should not provide false credentials or falsely claim they lack access.

Personal Devices at the Workplace

The presence of a personal phone, computer, or bag at a workplace does not automatically resolve whether it falls within the warrant.

Employees should not conceal or remove devices once a search begins. If agents seek a personal device, the employee or company representative may identify it as personally owned and ask whether the agents believe the warrant covers it. The objection should be documented without physically interfering.

Attorney-Client Privileged Materials

The company should identify materials that may contain confidential attorney-client communications or attorney work product.

The representative should:

Clearly identify the potentially privileged material;
State that the company asserts applicable privilege;
Ask agents to segregate the material;
Request that it not be reviewed by the investigative team;
Ask for use of an appropriate privilege-review or filter process; and
Document the objection.

The company should not physically prevent agents from taking materials covered by the warrant. Counsel should contact the prosecutor or agency promptly to address privilege review.

The privilege generally protects qualifying legal communications, not underlying facts or preexisting business records.

Confidential and Regulated Information

A workplace may contain medical information, trade secrets, customer records, financial information, export-controlled data, or other regulated material.

Confidentiality obligations do not necessarily prevent agents from seizing evidence authorized by a warrant. The company should nevertheless identify sensitive information, request appropriate handling safeguards, and document what was accessed or taken.

Employee Interviews During a Raid

Agents may ask employees to answer questions while the search is underway.

An employee may ask:

Am I free to leave?
Is this interview voluntary?
Am I being detained?
May I speak with an attorney?
May I have a business card so my attorney can contact you?

Employees should tell the truth and should not speculate, guess, conceal evidence, or provide knowingly false information.

The company should not direct employees to refuse lawful interviews, tell employees what to say, retaliate against employees who cooperate, or attempt to coordinate witness accounts.

Interviews of Managers and Company Representatives

Statements made by executives, HR personnel, supervisors, or hiring managers may affect both the individual and the company.

Before answering substantive questions, the manager should determine:

Whether the interview is voluntary;
Whether the person is being treated as a witness, subject, or target;
Whether company counsel can be present;
Whether separate personal counsel may be appropriate; and
Whether the manager is authorized to speak for the company.

A person should not assume that an informal conversation is off the record. Knowingly false statements to federal agents can create criminal exposure independent of the underlying investigation.

Does Company Counsel Represent Individual Employees?

Company counsel ordinarily represents the organization, not every employee or manager individually.

When company counsel interviews an employee, counsel may explain that:

Counsel represents the company;
The conversation is being conducted to provide legal advice to the company;
The company controls the attorney-client privilege; and
The company may decide whether to disclose information learned during the interview.

Separate counsel may be appropriate when the interests of an employee, manager, executive, or owner could differ from those of the company.

Employee Arrests During a Raid

The employer should not physically interfere with an arrest or attempt to hide or remove an employee.

When possible, the company should document:

The employee’s name;
The agency taking custody;
The time and location;
Information agents provide concerning where the employee is being taken;
Personal property left at the workplace; and
Any urgent medical or safety information communicated to agents.

The company should coordinate family inquiries, payroll, benefits, scheduling, and personal-property issues with counsel. It should not publicly disclose or speculate about an employee’s immigration status.

Workplace Safety and Business Operations

A worksite raid does not eliminate legitimate safety obligations.

If agents enter a manufacturing floor, kitchen, warehouse, laboratory, construction site, or hazardous area, the designated representative should explain applicable safety requirements. The company should not use safety procedures as a pretext to delay or obstruct the search.

The response team should also evaluate:

Whether machinery must be shut down safely;
Whether food, chemicals, or controlled materials require protection;
Whether detained employees were performing critical functions;
Whether seized computers affect payroll or operations;
Whether customer or patient services can continue; and
Whether emergency staffing is required.

How Do ICE Worksite Investigations Begin?

An ICE raid is rarely the beginning of an investigation. Before seeking a search warrant, federal agents may spend months—or longer—reviewing records, interviewing witnesses, comparing government data, and developing evidence of suspected violations.

A worksite investigation may begin with:

A Form I-9 Notice of Inspection;
A Notice of Suspect Documents;
Information from a current or former employee;
Reports of identity theft or fraudulent documents;
A referral from another government agency;
Payroll, wage, tax, or identity information suggesting irregularities;
An investigation involving a staffing company or subcontractor;
Evidence discovered during an unrelated criminal investigation;
Allegations of labor exploitation, trafficking, document fraud, or harboring; or
A previous compliance investigation or settlement.

No single factor necessarily proves that an employer violated the law. For example, a Social Security number mismatch does not, by itself, establish that an employee lacks employment authorization. Employers should investigate discrepancies consistently without discriminating or taking premature employment action.

Can a Form I-9 Audit Lead to a Raid?

Yes. An administrative Form I-9 inspection can develop into a civil enforcement case or criminal investigation when ICE believes the records reveal knowing employment, fraudulent documentation, false statements, identity theft, harboring, obstruction, or a pattern or practice of violations.

In January 2026, federal agents executed search warrants at 14 restaurant locations in the Phoenix area. According to the Department of Justice, the investigation began with Form I-9 Notices of Inspection issued in March 2025. Investigators subsequently reviewed employment, identity, Social Security, date-of-birth, and wage information before obtaining the warrants.

The government’s allegations included knowing employment of unauthorized workers, false Form I-9 attestations, identity-related offenses, and aggravated identity theft. As with every criminal case, allegations are not proof of guilt and the defendants are entitled to the presumption of innocence. U.S. Department of Justice: Execution of Federal Search Warrants at Phoenix-Area Restaurants

This illustrates why an employer should not treat a Notice of Inspection as a routine records request. The company’s records, response to identified discrepancies, and conduct after receiving notice may affect whether the matter remains administrative or becomes more serious.

Warning Signs of an Escalating Investigation

Potential warning signs may include:

ICE issues a Notice of Inspection covering Forms I-9 and related records;
The employer receives a substantial Notice of Suspect Documents;
Agents contact current or former employees, supervisors, HR personnel, or company officers;
The company receives a subpoena seeking payroll, hiring, tax, staffing, or electronic records;
A staffing company, labor contractor, vendor, or subcontractor becomes the subject of an investigation;
Employees report that their identities or Social Security numbers have been used by someone else;
Government agencies request overlapping employment and wage information;
A former employee makes allegations involving unauthorized employment or document fraud;
Investigators ask who made hiring, retention, or termination decisions;
Managers are asked whether they knew about document or work-authorization problems; or
Agents appear at multiple company locations at approximately the same time.

These circumstances do not necessarily mean that a raid is imminent. They should prompt immediate consultation with counsel, preservation of records, and careful control of company communications.

An employer should never destroy documents, alter records, coach witnesses, retaliate against an employee, hide workers, or provide false information. Those actions can create criminal exposure independent of the original immigration-compliance issue.

Investigative Techniques Used in Worksite Cases

Form I-9 inspections

ICE may inspect Forms I-9 and related records to identify missing forms, recurring errors, suspicious document patterns, or evidence that the employer continued employing workers after receiving credible information concerning their authorization.

Database and record comparisons

Investigators may compare Form I-9 information with payroll, wage, tax, identity, immigration, and other available records.

A mismatch may require investigation, but it should not automatically be treated as proof that an employee is unauthorized.

Witness interviews

Agents may interview current employees, former employees, HR personnel, supervisors, hiring managers, staffing-company representatives, and others familiar with the company’s practices.

Subpoenas and document requests

Investigators or prosecutors may seek:

Forms I-9 and supporting records;
Payroll and tax records;
Personnel files;
Hiring and termination records;
Staffing-company agreements;
Emails and text messages;
Electronic access records;
Corporate ownership information; and
Policies, training records, and internal-audit materials.

Whether the company must produce a particular record—and whether it may be privileged—depends on the type and scope of the legal demand.

Surveillance and undercover activity

In appropriate cases, investigators may conduct surveillance, use cooperating witnesses, record communications, or engage in undercover activity. Employers should assume that statements made to employees, applicants, vendors, or former personnel could eventually be reviewed by investigators.

Multiagency investigations

ICE Homeland Security Investigations may work with the Department of Justice, Department of Labor, IRS Criminal Investigation, FBI, Social Security Administration, or state and local authorities.

A worksite investigation can therefore involve immigration, employment, tax, identity, fraud, trafficking, or other criminal issues simultaneously.

Industries and Workforce Structures With Recurring Compliance Risk

Worksite enforcement is not limited to one industry. The following sectors frequently present compliance challenges because of high turnover, decentralized hiring, seasonal work, subcontracting, staffing-company relationships, or large hourly workforces.

Industry or workforce structure	Recurring compliance concerns
Construction	Multiple subcontractors, temporary crews, decentralized hiring, and uncertainty over which entity controls the workforce
Manufacturing	Large hourly workforces, shift-based hiring, staffing agencies, and pressure to fill positions
Food processing and production	High turnover, labor contractors, remote facilities, and concentrated hiring
Restaurants and hospitality	Decentralized hiring, multiple locations, turnover, and inconsistent manager training
Agriculture and landscaping	Seasonal labor, labor contractors, transportation or housing arrangements, and remote worksites
Warehousing and logistics	Rapid hiring, temporary labor, third-party staffing, and multiple shifts
Cleaning and janitorial services	Dispersed worksites, subcontracting, and limited centralized supervision
Staffing companies and PEOs	Responsibility divided among recruiters, clients, worksites, and payroll administrators
Home healthcare and personal services	Decentralized employees, remote document review, and inconsistent local practices
Technology and remote-work companies	Remote verification, identity fraud, electronic-document handling, and employees working from multiple jurisdictions

This is not an official list of industries guaranteed to be targeted by ICE. Risk depends on the employer’s actual practices, workforce structure, compliance history, and the information available to investigators.

Creating a Written ICE Raid Response Plan

Every employer should have a written plan identifying what will happen if agents arrive at any company location.

A plan maintained only in the general counsel’s office will not be useful if agents first encounter a receptionist, security guard, plant manager, or shift supervisor.

Executive leadership

A designated executive should have authority to coordinate operations, approve emergency decisions, and ensure employees do not interfere with the search.

Legal counsel

The plan should include current telephone numbers for immigration compliance counsel and, when appropriate, criminal defense counsel. At least one backup attorney should be identified.

Reception and security

Receptionists and security personnel should know:

Who must be contacted immediately;
How to request and copy a warrant;
That they should remain professional;
That an administrative ICE warrant is different from a judicial warrant;
That they should not provide unauthorized consent; and
Where agents may wait while counsel is contacted, when circumstances permit.

Human resources

HR should be prepared to locate Forms I-9 and personnel records without making unauthorized statements about individual employees. HR personnel should understand that employment records may be evidence and should not be altered after an investigation begins.

Information technology

The IT plan should address:

Servers, computers, phones, email, and cloud systems;
Company-owned and personal devices;
Preservation of electronic records;
Backup systems and business continuity;
Privileged or regulated information; and
Documentation of devices and accounts searched or seized.

Operations and safety

A designated manager should be able to explain legitimate safety requirements involving machinery, hazardous materials, secured areas, food safety, patients, or other operational concerns.

Communications

Only an authorized spokesperson should respond on behalf of the company to employees, families, customers, vendors, or the media. Managers should avoid speculation about the investigation or individual employees.

Elements of an Effective Raid Response Plan

A complete plan should include:

A 24-hour emergency contact list;
Procedures for reviewing and copying warrants;
Maps identifying public and nonpublic areas;
Instructions prohibiting unauthorized consent;
Representatives assigned to monitor the search;
A method for recording participating agents;
Forms for documenting locations searched and property seized;
Procedures for identifying privileged materials;
An electronic-data and business-continuity plan;
Instructions addressing employee interviews;
A plan for responding to employee arrests and family inquiries;
A media and customer-communications protocol;
Record-preservation instructions; and
Procedures for beginning a privileged post-raid investigation.

Multi-location companies should designate a response team at every facility. Agents may execute warrants simultaneously, and the company’s primary HR or legal personnel may not be present at every location.

Conducting a Worksite-Raid Tabletop Exercise

Employers should periodically test the written plan through a tabletop exercise.

The exercise can determine whether:

Reception knows whom to call;
Counsel can be reached promptly;
Employees recognize different types of warrants;
Managers know who may authorize consent;
The company can monitor the search;
IT can maintain operations if equipment is seized;
Privileged materials can be identified;
The company can respond appropriately if employees are detained;
Multiple locations can communicate securely; and
The spokesperson can address employees and the media.

The exercise should test procedures, not coach employees about what to tell investigators. Employees should be instructed to tell the truth, avoid speculation, and determine whether an interview is voluntary.

Employer Preparedness Checklist

Before government agents arrive, an employer should be able to answer “yes” to the following questions:

Do reception and security know whom to contact?
Does the company have current emergency numbers for counsel?
Are public and nonpublic areas clearly identified?
Does management understand who may consent to a search?
Can personnel distinguish a judicial warrant from an ICE administrative warrant?
Is there a procedure for monitoring and documenting a search?
Are potentially privileged records identifiable?
Can IT preserve records and maintain essential operations?
Are managers trained to avoid obstruction, retaliation, and unauthorized statements?
Is there a plan for communicating with employees and families?
Has the company conducted a recent internal Form I-9 audit?
Has the response plan been tested at every location?

Attorney Insight

Most employers cannot predict whether federal agents will arrive. They can control whether the first employee who encounters the agents knows whom to call, whether anyone gives unnecessary consent, whether privileged information is identified, and whether the company preserves evidence and maintains essential operations.

A response plan cannot eliminate underlying legal risk. It can prevent an already serious situation from becoming worse through confusion, inconsistent statements, lost records, unauthorized consent, or allegations of obstruction.

What Should an Employer Do After a Raid?

The company’s response should continue after agents leave. Decisions made during the first several hours can affect the employer’s ability to continue operating, respond to the investigation, protect privileged communications, and defend against civil or criminal allegations.

Obtain and review the government’s documents

Collect and preserve copies of:

The search warrant and supporting documents provided to the company;
Subpoenas, Notices of Inspection, or other demands;
The inventory or receipt identifying property seized;
Business cards and agent contact information; and
Any notices concerning detained employees.

Compare the government’s inventory with the property the company believes was taken. Identify missing computers, phones, records, access credentials, or equipment necessary for business operations.

Document what happened

Each company representative who observed the operation should prepare a factual account while the events remain fresh.

The report should identify:

When agents arrived and departed;
Which agencies participated;
Locations searched;
Records, devices, and property examined or seized;
Questions asked;
Employees or managers interviewed;
Statements made by company representatives;
Objections or privilege concerns raised;
Areas searched that may have been outside the warrant; and
Operational, safety, or property issues resulting from the search.

Employees should document what they personally observed without speculation or collaboration intended to make everyone’s account identical.

Preserve relevant evidence

Counsel should promptly issue appropriate document-preservation instructions. Potentially relevant materials may include:

Forms I-9 and supporting records;
Personnel and payroll records;
Hiring and termination records;
Emails and text messages;
Internal messaging platforms;
Staffing-company and subcontractor records;
Security video and access logs;
Electronic verification records;
Training materials and compliance policies;
Prior internal-audit records;
Government correspondence; and
Records concerning employees identified by investigators.

Routine deletion, email destruction, device replacement, and record-retention processes may need to be suspended.

Destroying or altering information after learning of an investigation can create obstruction exposure even if the original records would not have established an immigration violation.

Protect potentially privileged information

Counsel should determine whether privileged attorney-client communications or attorney work product may have been reviewed or seized.

If so, counsel may need to contact the prosecutor or agency promptly to request segregation and an appropriate privilege-review process.

The attorney-client privilege generally protects qualifying confidential legal communications. It does not automatically protect preexisting business records, underlying facts, or every document copied to an attorney.

Stabilize business operations

The company should determine whether seized equipment, detained personnel, or unavailable records affect:

Payroll;
Employee scheduling;
Customer obligations;
Production;
Workplace safety;
Access to buildings or systems;
Regulatory reporting; or
Data security.

Necessary operational changes should be documented and coordinated with counsel. The company should not recreate, alter, or backdate records in an effort to replace materials taken by the government.

Conducting a Privileged Internal Investigation

After addressing immediate operational needs, counsel should help the company determine what occurred and what legal exposure may exist.

A post-raid investigation may examine:

Form I-9 completion and retention practices;
Recurring irregularities in Forms I-9 or supporting documents;
How the company responded to prior discrepancies;
Who controlled hiring, verification, retention, and termination;
Whether managers received reports concerning fraudulent or borrowed identities;
Whether the company received prior government notices;
Staffing-company and subcontractor supervision;
Communications among HR, managers, recruiters, and leadership;
Payroll, tax, wage, and identity records;
Whether anyone provided false information, altered records, or obstructed the investigation; and
Whether similar issues exist at locations not covered by the warrant.

The investigation’s scope and structure should be directed by counsel. Merely labeling a review “privileged” does not necessarily make it privileged.

Responding to Government Follow-Up

A search may be followed by:

Grand jury subpoenas;
Interview requests;
A Form I-9 Notice of Inspection;
Requests for payroll or personnel records;
Contact from prosecutors;
Requests for consent to search additional systems;
Notices relating to seized electronic information; or
Administrative or criminal charges.

No employee should destroy information or provide a knowingly false response. At the same time, the company should not produce records or consent to additional searches without understanding the legal basis, scope, deadline, privilege issues, and consequences.

Counsel may communicate with the government to:

Confirm who is directing the investigation;
Clarify deadlines and production requirements;
Preserve objections;
Address privileged or regulated information;
Seek access to essential records or devices;
Discuss electronic-production formats; and
Determine whether representatives are considered witnesses, subjects, or targets.

Communicating With Employees After a Raid

Employees will likely have questions, particularly if coworkers were interviewed or detained.

An initial company communication may explain:

That government agents conducted activity at the workplace;
Whether the facility remains open;
Where employees should report for work;
How payroll and scheduling will be handled;
Who can answer employment-related questions;
That employees must preserve relevant company records;
That retaliation or interference is prohibited; and
That employees should not speak on behalf of the company unless authorized.

The company should not instruct employees to provide a particular version of events. Employees should be told to tell the truth and determine whether an interview is voluntary.

Employment Decisions After a Raid

Employers should not make indiscriminate termination decisions based solely on nationality, accent, place of birth, perceived immigration status, inclusion in an investigation, or an absence caused by detention.

At the same time, an employer generally may not knowingly continue employing an individual who lacks authorization to work in the United States.

Before suspending or terminating an employee, the company should consider:

What information the government actually provided;
Whether the employee has been given an appropriate opportunity to respond;
Whether reverification is legally required;
Whether the company is improperly requesting a particular document;
Whether similarly situated employees are treated consistently;
Applicable leave, wage, discrimination, and collective-bargaining requirements; and
Whether the decision could appear retaliatory.

An arrest does not establish guilt, and inclusion on a government list does not always resolve an employee’s work-authorization status.

Potential Employer and Individual Exposure

Form I-9 paperwork penalties

Employers may face civil penalties for substantive Form I-9 violations and for technical or procedural failures that are not corrected after the required notice and opportunity.

Employers facing proposed penalties should review our guide to Form I-9 fines, Notice of Intent to Fine defense, and OCAHO proceedings.

Knowing-employment penalties

An employer may face civil penalties if it knowingly hires or continues employing an individual who is not authorized to work.

Knowledge can include actual knowledge and, under some circumstances, constructive knowledge inferred from available facts. A discrepancy alone does not necessarily establish constructive knowledge, but the employer’s response to credible information can become important.

Criminal immigration violations

Federal law permits criminal prosecution when an employer engages in a pattern or practice of knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers.

Depending on the evidence, prosecutors may also investigate harboring, transporting, document fraud, false statements, identity offenses, tax violations, money laundering, or obstruction.

Relevant federal authority includes 8 U.S.C. § 1324a, although the particular statutes involved will depend on the alleged conduct.

Individual liability

The government may investigate company owners, executives, HR personnel, recruiters, supervisors, or hiring managers when evidence suggests they personally participated in, directed, concealed, or knowingly permitted unlawful conduct.

A company’s legal structure does not necessarily protect an individual from responsibility for the individual’s own actions.

Debarment and contractual consequences

Immigration or related violations may also affect government contracts, licenses, financing arrangements, insurance coverage, customer relationships, and representations made in corporate transactions.

Media and Public Communications

A worksite raid can attract immediate attention from employees, customers, local media, and social media users.

The company should designate one spokesperson and coordinate public statements with counsel. An initial statement may be limited:

Federal agents conducted law-enforcement activity at one of the company’s facilities today. The company is reviewing the matter with counsel and is cooperating as legally appropriate. Because the investigation is ongoing, the company cannot comment on individual employees or specific allegations at this time.

The company should not speculate, accuse employees of wrongdoing, disclose confidential personnel information, or claim it has been cleared before the relevant facts are known.

Frequently Asked Questions About ICE Worksite Raids

Can ICE enter the public areas of a business?

ICE agents can generally enter areas open to the public, such as a public lobby, reception area, dining room, or retail space. Entry into nonpublic areas ordinarily requires valid legal authority, consent, or an applicable emergency circumstance.

Can an employer refuse to comply with a federal search warrant?

An employer should not obstruct agents executing a valid judicial search warrant. The company may review the warrant, contact counsel, raise appropriate objections, identify privileged materials, and monitor the search without physically interfering.

Does an ICE administrative warrant authorize a workplace search?

An ICE administrative warrant, including Form I-200 or I-205, is not the same as a judicial search warrant signed by a federal judge or magistrate judge.

Standing alone, it generally does not authorize agents to enter nonpublic business areas without consent.

Should the company consent to a search?

Employees should not give consent unless authorized by the company and advised by counsel. If agents have a valid judicial warrant, they may execute it within its lawful scope without the company’s consent.

Can the employer copy the warrant?

Yes. The designated representative should request a copy, review the address and areas covered, identify the property agents are authorized to seize, and send it to counsel immediately.

Can the company call its lawyer before agents begin searching?

The company may contact counsel, but agents executing a judicial warrant generally are not required to delay the search until counsel arrives. Counsel should nevertheless be notified immediately.

Do employees have to answer questions?

It depends on the circumstances. An employee may ask whether the interview is voluntary and whether the employee is free to leave or decline. Employees should not lie, destroy evidence, or interfere with the investigation.

Can a manager speak with counsel before an interview?

A manager may request an opportunity to speak with counsel. Whether questioning will be delayed depends on the circumstances. The manager should also understand that company counsel represents the company unless individual representation has been expressly established.

Can the company tell employees not to speak with agents?

The company should not interfere with lawful interviews or retaliate against employees who cooperate. It may advise employees to tell the truth, ask whether an interview is voluntary, and seek their own legal advice.

Can ICE seize computers and phones?

A judicial warrant may authorize seizure or copying of electronic devices and data. The authority depends on the warrant’s language. The company should identify personal devices and potentially privileged or regulated information without physically obstructing the seizure.

Should an employer reverify every employee after a raid?

Not automatically. Unnecessary reverification can create discrimination and document-abuse risks. The employer should determine with counsel which Forms I-9 or employees require follow-up and apply the process consistently.

Does an internal Form I-9 audit prevent a raid?

No. An internal audit cannot guarantee that an employer will avoid an investigation. It can identify correctable problems, demonstrate compliance efforts, improve future practices, and reduce the risk that preventable errors will complicate the defense.

What if senior management is unavailable?

Reception or security should follow the written plan, contact designated backups and counsel, request a copy of the warrant, avoid giving unauthorized consent, and remain professional.

What if agents execute warrants at several locations?

Each location should activate its response team, obtain the documents presented there, and assign representatives to document the search. A centralized legal team should coordinate the response while preserving separate factual accounts from each location.

Preparing Before a Worksite Enforcement Action

Employers should not wait for a subpoena, Notice of Inspection, or search warrant to evaluate compliance.

Proactive measures may include:

Conducting a counsel-directed internal Form I-9 audit;
Reviewing procedures for responding to ICE Form I-9 inspections;
Providing Form I-9 training for HR and hiring managers;
Evaluating staffing-company and subcontractor relationships;
Correcting Forms I-9 properly without concealing the original information;
Establishing procedures for investigating credible discrepancies;
Creating a written raid-response plan;
Conducting a tabletop exercise at each location; and
Identifying counsel before an emergency occurs.

Conclusion

An ICE worksite raid can expose an employer to simultaneous immigration, employment, criminal, tax, operational, and reputational risks. A company may receive little or no notice that agents are coming, but it can prepare its employees to respond lawfully and consistently.

Effective preparation combines properly completed Forms I-9, trained personnel, carefully managed staffing relationships, a written response plan, and immediate access to counsel.

Please do not hesitate to contact Matthew Myers or Myers Immigration Law with questions concerning ICE worksite investigations, employer preparedness, Form I-9 compliance, or a government enforcement action at (210) 640-7424 or info@myersimmigration.com.

The above is informational and not legal advice. Please consult with an experienced Form I-9 and Employer Compliance attorney on your specific facts and circumstances before proceeding with any U.S. immigration strategy.