The Supreme Court upheld Arizona's 2007 law requiring businesses to use E-Verify. I've written about this numerous times in the past, and as yet my conclusion hasn't changed. E-Verify can potentially be an effective tool for enforcement, but is still extremely expensive and loaded with onerous bugs.
A December 2010 GAO report notes that:
--the program has improved its accuracy, but still screws up with a lot of people and then has a very cumbersome and lengthy (average of 104 days) of rectifying that (in 2010 the DHS' own consultants were extremely critical)
--there is no good estimate of its cost on local governments (in 2009 officials in Georgia acknowledged that it was so expensive they were not really enforcing anything)
E-Verify supporters ignore these issues. For example, in an op-ed about the ruling Lamar Smith (R-TX) and Ken Calvert (R-CA) write the following:
E-Verify provides American employers who want to do the right thing with a straightforward tool to do so. Just like the red push-button marked “easy,” E-Verify easily confirms legal workers with just a click of a mouse.
Now, that was easy.
I suppose many people will believe that, despite facts. We will end up more mired in the current situation, with haphazard enforcement and growing frustration on all sides.