Inside the Legal Risk of I-9 Violations

In today’s enforcement climate, Form I-9 compliance has moved beyond an HR-only responsibility. Legal departments—especially in-house counsel and employment attorneys—are increasingly called upon to assess the organization’s risk exposure, ensure regulatory alignment, and defend against potential audits or discrimination claims. As federal scrutiny increases and remote verification policies evolve, corporate legal teams must take a more active role in managing this area of risk. This paper outlines where the legal vulnerabilities lie and how legal professionals can help build a defensible compliance strategy.

The Scope of Legal Risk

I-9 violations can expose a company to serious financial and reputational damage. Civil penalties for simple paperwork violations can add up quickly, particularly in high-volume hiring environments. For example, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can impose fines of up to $2,861 per I-9 error—even for unintentional mistakes. These fines are levied per form, per employee, and often retroactively during an audit.

In addition to civil fines, companies may also face:

• Criminal liability for knowingly hiring unauthorized workers

• DOJ investigations for discriminatory practices during the verification process

• Public relations damage when enforcement actions are publicized

Legal exposure often surfaces years after the fact, when it is too late to make corrections. That delay increases the stakes, particularly for legal teams who are tasked with defending outdated, paper-based, or decentralized systems.

Where I-9 Compliance Breaks Down

Many legal risks stem from operational inconsistencies. When I-9s are handled manually or across multiple offices without oversight, the result is often a patchwork process with significant legal gaps. Below are some of the most common failure points:

Incomplete or Incorrect Forms:

Errors such as missing signatures, incorrect dates, or untimely completion remain some of the most common—and costly—compliance issues.

Mishandling Remote Verification:

As remote work becomes standard, many employers struggle to implement DHS-compliant alternative procedures. Failure to document and follow the correct process opens the door to noncompliance.

Discriminatory Practices:

The Department of Justice’s Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (IER) continues to enforce anti-discrimination provisions related to employment eligibility. Common triggers include:

• Requesting more or different documents than required

• Treating non-U.S. citizens differently during the verification process

• Improperly reverifying work authorization documents

These actions can lead to DOJ settlements, fines, and training mandates.

Enforcement Trends Legal Counsel Should Monitor

Federal enforcement is not only ongoing—it’s intensifying. In recent years, large-scale audits and high-profile settlements have made headlines across industries. Legal counsel must be prepared to respond to Notices of Inspection (NOIs) and subpoenas, often with little advance warning.

In these cases, legal teams are expected to:

• Produce compliant, timely I-9s

• Demonstrate a consistent, documented process

• Provide proof of internal controls and training

Even companies that believe they are “low risk” based on size or industry have been caught off guard during audits. Legal defensibility hinges on proactive system design—not reactive damage control.

Making Compliance a Legal Priority

For legal teams, the goal is not just compliance—it’s defensibility. That means ensuring that every I-9 form is completed correctly, stored securely, and easily retrievable in the event of an audit. Legal departments should collaborate with HR and compliance leaders to assess whether their current I-9 process meets that standard.

What to evaluate:

• Are forms being completed and signed on time?

• Is there a standardized process across all locations and employee types?

• Can your team quickly respond to an ICE audit or DOJ inquiry?

• Are safeguards in place to prevent discrimination during the verification process?

• Is your technology aligned with current DHS guidance on remote verification?

These are not just operational questions—they are legal risk checkpoints.

As scrutiny around employment eligibility continues to grow, I-9 compliance is no longer a function that legal teams can afford to overlook. Mistakes made in onboarding can resurface years later in the form of government audits, fines, or discrimination claims. The legal department plays a critical role in building systems and oversight that not only comply with federal law but stand up under audit or litigation. The time to address these risks is before enforcement arrives—not after.