Dashboard: Are You Risking Everything You’ve Built?

[Music] Welcome to another 21 Hats dashboard. I'm Lauren Feldman and I'm here with Sheila Murthy who is founder and CEO of the Murthy Law Firm which specializes in immigration law. Welcome, Miss Murthy. >> Thank you so much, Lauren. I appreciate the opportunity. >> Oh, I appreciate you being here and taking the time. I suspect you've been pretty busy these days. >> For sure. It's been a crazy rough ride for most people, organizations, universities, hospitals, employers, tech companies, uh, and keeps all of us immigration lawyers busier than we might want to be. >> I can imagine. Um, obviously most of what has been said and written about the current immigration crackdown has has focused largely on the individuals, the immigrants who have been affected by it and and appropriately so. But the businesses who employ immigrants have faced some real challenges too and and that's what I'd like to focus on with you today. You yourself are an immigrant and you yourself are an entrepreneur. Um, maybe we could start by talking about that a little bit. What what brought you to this country? >> Ah, wow. Okay. we're going back. So I I often joke with a lot in fact in uh Denver a couple weeks ago at the annual immigration lawyers conference where there were thousands and thousands of immigration lawyers in the middle of June um I for the first time shared my journey which is a bunch of you know immigration statuses referred to by the non-immigrant status. So I came in to represent uh India in uh you know exactly 40 years ago 1985 for the Philip Jessup international law mood court competition came second in the world for the written memorial third best individual oralist for the international division and then came back to do my F1 at Harvard Law School to be an F1 full-time student was a student security guard along with doing it as allowed you know worked actually in the Boston police department, all you know, kosher, proper, F1 status, studied full-time, worked full-time, did everything like most kids that, you know, try to juggle life and juggle family and ensure that you're not in huge debt. and then from the F1 to a J1 uh uh as an international exchange scholar at one of the largest international law firms in the world um in New York City at Whit and Case and from there the H1B with Whiten case and then H1B with law firms in Baltimore, Maryland. Um then got my green card then my citizenship finally long slow drawn out process. Um came in as an immigrant. So when people struggle, when people suffer, when my clients say, "You don't understand the stress I'm going through." I say, "I've been in your shoes. I absolutely get you." >> You obviously had um job opportunities coming out of uh law school. Um what made you choose to start your own firm? >> Excellent question. I I was naive enough and dumb enough. I think that's one of the advantages or disadvantages as I joked that you know when you're in your late 20s early 30s you think oh I'm going to start my own business and I'm not going to have to work crazy hours I'm going to have choose my hours have a good life and not stress and work seven days a week alas my ignorance maybe it was good I was ignorant because I might have never jumped into starting my own firm but in hindsight of course it was a wonderful thing. We've had deep and meaningful impact in the lives of people, you know, done very very important work for our clients. But my goal was have a normal life. Don't work seven days a week. Don't work 14 16 hours a day uh like the big law firms. But as I said, when I started my firm, I was doing probably more if not equal, seven days a week, working 12, 14, 16 hours days. And it was in the dark ages of the internet. So the internet was just taking off and uh you know I started getting more active and actively engaged involved in answering questions for organizations and that changed the trajectory of our law firm. >> Did you struggle at first? Was it hard to get the business off the ground? >> Absolutely. So like most people I had read somewhere and learned that when you don't have work don't think oh I'm going to enjoy myself if you don't have a job you need to spend 8 to 10 to 12 hours a day looking for a job. And so I was spending 8, 10, 12 hours a day looking for clients, networking, schmoozing, attending events, speaking, writing, writing articles, speaking in at the bar association, seminars, uh the B bar association of Baltimore City because I was in Maryland back then, state Maryland State Bar Association. I was involved in various committees. Um, I think Lawyers Weekly USA did up a huge article back in 1997, you know, almost 38 year or whatever, 28 almost 30 years ago talking about the world's best law firm lawyer website, mirthy.com. >> Wow. >> It's still considered, by the way, the the I think the world's most popular legal website, not immigration law website, legal website. And again, it's a testament to providing accurate, cutting edge, useful information to help people to do it with a good heart with genuine care. Um, and it's also a testament to the fact that our country still attracts people from all across the globe who still still look at this as a great nation of immigrants. I hope we don't lose that. I hope we don't forget our history. I hope we don't abandon and forsake the ideals on which this country was founded because by encouraging and embracing and welcoming people from all across the globe, we actually strengthen our country and bring the best to our shores. And it is I believe that democracy is unleashed um for the create with creative uh contributions of people when different people mingle and and share ideas in this marketplace of ideas. >> I'm really intrigued that uh you won an award for a legal website in 1997. I I'm guessing there were a lot of substantial law firms back then that didn't even have a website. What did you figure out? What did you get right? So, as I often joke, I was my my smartness is knowing how dumb I am and knowing my limitations, right? Because I knew that I'm not into technology. I knew that. But my husband was actually teaching at the Maryland Institute College of Art. Long hair, long beard, typical hippie artist looking guy. He said the internet's going to change the world. and some organization that asked me if I would uh they had back then 10,000 members in 9495 uh whether I would join and give away free advice. I said, "Free advice. I'm going to become bankrupt if I give away the only thing I have, which is knowledge." And he said, "Don't worry, Sheila. Internet's going to change the world. If you get known as the go-to person in the world for US immigration, it's going to grow your business." And only because I trusted this man who I knew was tethered to me and loved me. Um, and I usually argue. We lawyers put up a good argument against everyone, but I argued a little, but then realized he had no skin in the game other than genuinely to help me and point me towards the light. And so getting those instructions, I do I I I jumped in with both feet, hook, line, and sinker as they say, with the determination to take every question that came my way very seriously, to research it, to type in answers myself manually because I had only I me and myself in my law firm back then when I first started. and uh just did such a great job that the word started spreading around the the the internet and around the country like wow if if she can give so much help and guidance and support you when you aren't even paying for it think of how much better service you will get if you actually hire that law firm that lawyer >> and the website has continued to work for you to this day >> yeah that's how we get majority of our clients in business y >> is there anything in particular you're doing differently today now that you have more resources? What's working on the website today? >> Ah so yeah my husband whom was my free web master back then has absolutely refused in 30 plus years. Uh he said you can hire other people. So we've hired outsiders though sometimes we go to him to give us you know in depth. He has a more intuitive sort of knowledge and has seen the firm from its inception. Um we we we do live chats, we do other stuff, but we started doing a lot more mini podcasts. Um you know, 30 years ago, we weren't doing webinars for law for employers. We do monthly webinars. The weekly bulletin has continued. The live chat, the forum has about I think approximately 100 150,000 active users, somewhere in that range. >> Wow. >> Between 70 and 150,000, I think it varies. Um, but when people are nervous and scared, more people sort of sign up. But it's true that the younger generation relies on other sources and social media. We kind of a little bit we're not as proactive in social media though we are trying to get back into it because at one point I just figured the next generation should take over and I should slowly start allowing younger lawyers to spread their wings. >> Interesting. So, what kind of impact has the Trump administration's crackdown on immigration had on your firm? >> So, like most businesses, individuals, employers, universities, hospitals, everybody, there's obviously grave concern about when rules will suddenly change because a lot of students visas were abruptly terminated with no explanation. people who had no cases or closed cases, dismissed cases and only because of multitudes of lawsuits that several law firms and lawyers got involved including the Mushi law firm, my law firm. The the government then reversed its position, backpedled and reinstated the visas of all the students or the status of all the students whom they had unlawfully terminated. Um, so there's been obviously fear, concern, trepidation. People aren't traveling as much. I don't think this is good for our economy. People aren't coming to the US as much. Nobody wants to come in because they're feeling unwelcome. >> Sure. >> So tourism has dropped. They said, I think airlines are losing money. Hotels are losing money. Um, so you know, it's not good for people trying to visit and to the US people coming to study. They're talking, I think, the direct impact. There was an article just last week that there could be1 billion dollars impact just on state of Maryland alone if you are international students if international students stop coming to just one state. So I would hate to think of the ripple effect uh you know apartments and condominiums and hotels and restaurants and everything in the world that's interconnected with everything else in this world. I speak to business owners all the time and many of them tend to be remarkably candid about all sorts of things uh including mistakes they make and when things aren't going well but they tend not to be very candid about this topic. They often have real questions about how to handle certain situations but they're reluctant to have those conversations publicly because they don't want to attract attention to their business out of fear of losing employees. So I' I'd like to run some scenarios by you and get your reaction. Starting with simply, you know, what advice would you give to a business owner who suspects that he or she employs someone who is not documented? >> So there's something in the US law that's obviously called the I9. Every employer has to complete an I9 on every employee. If you are E-Verify enrolled, you've verified the employment, you've checked documents, you are not required to be an investigator and go in and under the documents and make sure that they are legit. I mean, if you have actual knowledge, you're absolutely, you know, liable. But if you have done your homework, your due diligence, your HR team that thinks they've checked everything and everything looks proper, then you're allowed to hire that person. On the other hand, if you know someone is absolutely out of status, tells you I don't have papers, I entered illegally, then you are an employ as an employer will be liable for hiring unauthorized workers and some people have even and sometimes um organ the organization or your competition has in some cases over the years we've seen like RICO racketeering and you know influenced corrupt practices different kind of laws being used saying you're misusing abusing by hiring people paying below the competitive wage and gaining an unfair economic advantage to the detriment of your competition. So, and of course now you don't even have to worry about other employers uh suing, but right now the government's obviously focusing very heavily. They've increased their budget under the big beautiful bill as you know um to hire a lot more law enforcement for deportations, removals. We're seeing removals in weird cases, cases that were considered pretty clean, blessed by, you know, the law and people who are in a period of authorized stay by filing what's called the 485 adjustment of status. We're seeing those cases being subject to deportation or removal out of the blue with no good reason why a particular person was picked and somebody else wasn't selected to be re it's now the new word is removal versus deported which is the older term but we use both because sometimes people are more comfortable with the word deported. >> You were uh referring to kind of a don't ask don't tell uh situation. And it sounded where an employer is okay if they don't know um even if they suspect something, >> but they're still supposed to verify paperwork and documents. Lauren, >> but you're referring to uh someone you're actively hiring at the moment. Um, my understanding, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that the the rules have and the guidance from the government has evolved dramatically over the last 10 or 20 years, which means that there are businesses that could have somebody on the books for many years that they feel they they handled appropriately, but they have reason to suspect today, you know, maybe this person is not documented. Do you follow where I'm going with that? >> I I see what you're saying and it's true that they could be employees who've been around for 10, 15, 20 years if they entered. But then at that point when you were the I9 rules have been around for a very long time. So more than 10, 15, 20 years. So if the I9 rules said it and you were given the paperwork, but then since then, you know, you are supposed to ask for updated documents when if it was, let's say, a 5-year work permit, you're supposed to then ask if at the end of 5 years to show the updated approval or the extension from the government. >> But someone could give you an I9 with information that is not correct, um, is my understanding. And that does happen a lot. >> Yeah. Again, as an employer, I'm not an investigator. My job is the documents, if they look facally valid, if they're appropriate. Now, if they look facally invalid, or you have actual knowledge, this person entered illegally or whatever, then you're subject to the law. And obviously unlike federal immigration law which I can talk happily about when we get into employment issues because some of this is sort of borderline of employment law and immigration. I am not the world's sort of foremost expert on employment because each state has state employment laws and their federal employment laws. Immigration though is almost exclusively under the federal under the doctrine of preeemption subject to federal jurisdiction. though we do have states now trying to get involved and courts are seeming to have a problem with that issue. >> So if you're a business owner and you are in that situation where you have somebody who perhaps has been a really important part of the business uh for for many years but you're not sure what the situation is. Do do you have options there? Is is it possible especially in in in the current environment to help that person get a green card and ultimately citizenship is that even a thing anymore? >> Uh so if somebody entered what we call EWI or entry without inspection we call it eved. If somebody evied into the US, even if they're married to a US citizen, they have children, they have grandchildren, they've lived here for 30, 40, 50 years, doesn't matter. There is nothing the law does to allow that person to file within the US to switch from their current EV status with no status basically to US green card holder or citizen. If they entered legally and they're married to a US citizen, but they're now out of status slash illegal, undocumented is the word most people prefer to use because they say people are not illegal, only you don't have the right documents. So let's say you don't have the right paperwork, then marriage to a citizen, a valid bonafidey marriage would give that person legal status. Like everything in this world, Lauren, the devil is in the details. So each case, each situation would make a difference. We'd get into it and we say, "Okay, here we can do this for you or no, we can't do anything for you." So we would get into each case individually. We would try to figure it out. You know, enter legally. How long have you been out of status? Is it based on a spouse? Is it based on a child now who's over 21 years who can sponsor you? A US citizen child who can sponsor you after they turn 21 years old. But if you entered without inspection, you cannot file anything or get anything from within the US. You'll have to fly abroad and do something called consular processing. Um, so so basically I don't want to get into the weeds, but >> sure. >> Yes, each case is unique obviously. So, in this situation where an owner has an employee who's been there for many years who the owner suspects but doesn't really know may be undocumented. Does that mean that they have to consider getting rid of this person at that point? What would you advise? >> Oh, yeah. So I was just speaking with a major hospital um in Maryland yesterday and they said but when they especially with under the current regime with the current administration out of the blue they just pulled out the TPS the temporary protected status for tens of thousands of people or humanitarian parole for many people who have been here what they thought was in legal status with valid work authorizations. So that employer major major hospital network said hey we to try to find all the people in our database whose status has been revoked. We then send them notice that we have to terminate your employment. We think it's a matter of days not weeks or months. Even if they've been with us 5 10 15 years 20 years doesn't matter. It is our responsibility to follow the law. We don't want to run a foul of the law. And we want to be compassionate. We want to take them and help them, but our hands are tied in terms of the federal government pulling the the carpet out from under their feet and we have to comply with federal law. >> I can certainly see a, you know, a big employer, a corporation taking that kind of stance. I've spoken to owners who've described their situation to me as, you know, they've spoken to a lawyer and the lawyer has given them advice that the safest thing to do is what you just described, terminate the employee um as humanely as possible. Um, but the the owners, they're thinking, you know, this person has been with me for 10 or 20 years. They've helped me build the business. to do that. I would feel as though I'm I'm taking food out of their kids' mouths. I can't do it. If an owner chooses that course and chooses not to do it, um how big a risk are they taking? What's the worst that can happen? >> Well, so it depends. If the government comes, I always tell people nine out of 10 of us are breaking the law when we're driving above the speed limit. We hope we don't get caught. But when the cop pulls me over, I can't say, "How come you didn't catch those other nine people?" Because I was one of those nine people almost for months till I get that caught or get that ticket. So what? So it depends what the risk levels of course are. When the government comes and knocking, when someone investigates, when the fraud detection and national security or ICE agents, the immigration and customs enforcement comes on your door, they could like they did with the meat packing plant yesterday or day before, you know, take away 50% of their workforce. So, they can't now continue running their operations or their business. So, the risk level depends, like you said, on how valuable the person is, how much you're desperate and you need it. If it results in you shutting down your business, you may say, "I'll take my chances." Or some people say, "I don't want to take chances." Uh, you know, if it's my my skin or somebody else's, I'm going to not help. On the other hand, if you've known the family, the person, they've worked closely in a small business environment, you're much more likely to say, "I'll take my chances. I'll do what I want to do and a lot of landscaping businesses, small business, restaurants, uh you know, all kinds of businesses like you said, small businesses tend to say, "I don't know what to do, and I am at this point caught between a rock and a hard place." And those are I tell people as a lawyer, my job is only to tell you the law. I can tell you what the law is. If you say, "What would you do?" I can tell you what I would do. But I also know that another person in my shoes would probably do something different because each human being has to sleep at night and live it themselves. >> What would you do? >> Depends on my personal relationship with that person. Depends on what, you know, if I'm am I willing to jeopardize my business, my livelihood, my especially in today's uh environment potentially be considered. You know, they're saying let's put US citizens in remote. Let's send them out. Let's do X or Y. And you know, it's just beyond bizarre and scary that there is so much what appears to be blatant, blatant, and flagrant violations of the US Constitution um in not a loving and recognizing due process for forget foreign citizens, even for US citizens, permanent residents, you know, right to free speech and assembly. Um, and it's very interesting that people in dark in glass houses are throwing stones. >> Do you think it's possible that you've ever employed someone who was undocumented? >> Uh, unlikely. I don't think I've ever done that because we have a hopefully a good HR that's doing their job and that double checks and triple checks stuff. And uh just in our line of work, I think as law firms and lawyers, we just again, you know, the the minimum criteria for what I need um in terms of credentials, qualifications, um generally hasn't been a problem. But like you said, if somebody provided information that looked absolutely bonafideed, legit, said they spent their whole life in this country, but actually were brought here when they were two or three years old and provided me incorrect information or to my HR, it's anything is possible, but not to the best of my knowledge, information or belief. I don't believe we've ever um had any person who did not have proper work authorization and lawful status and paperwork. Here's another situation that I bet you're familiar with, and that's there are these employment agencies out there that will supply workers that they say have been vetted. My understanding is frequently the case that they they get I assure the uh companies they work with, every employee that they uh give them has been vetted through an I-9, but I don't believe they put them through E-Verify. And um yes, again, some of that information on the I-9 might not be accurate. Uh but the business owner who has used the employment agency is kind of in uh a situation of plausible deniability. They can use these employees and they assume be somewhat risk-free. >> Well, it depends. If it's when you say I9, do you mean a W9? Like an independent contractor? Uh well I guess they are employees of the employee employment agency. >> Okay. So then the employment agency is the employer, the person who's if you're hiring an independent contractor, you're not required to check the status of that work. And it's actually considered unlawful discrimination to ask somebody because they have an accent or they're a person of skin that you know do because that person very well could be a citizen or lawful permanent resident to say because you have a thick accent you need to show me your work authorization but you Lauren sound look American so I'm not going to ask you for your paperwork that would be a violation of the law. >> So I think there are businesses that use these employment agencies as kind of a workaround. It's a way to hire people that they might not be able to hire directly, but the they allow the agency to take a risk. It sounds like you're saying that the these companies who use the employment agencies are probably okay in that situation. Um, from a legal standpoint, >> yeah, based on the example you've given, it would sound like yes, obviously, as I always say, each case may depend, as I said earlier, Sure. the discussion if I have actual knowledge of a breach or actual information that may change my legal responsibility. But in general, yeah, if I rely if I go to a recruitment agency and they send me somebody, I can't ask for papers that don't that's not my job. That's not my responsibility as a business owner. So, I'm not required to if there is a legal requirement. The law needs to to make that a requirement. I'm not going to do more work than I need to. I'm barely surviving. I'm drowning most of the time as a business owner. I'm working seven days a week, 12, 14 hours a day like I did for years and years and years. Uh, you know, I you certainly don't want to start doing other work for which you don't even have time and you can't even finish the work. You're sort of juggling so much and you have so much on your plate. >> I've often wondered about the yeify system. It it seems like if if the government really wanted to uh block undocumented workers from taking jobs, why wouldn't the E-Verify be required of everybody, people being hired as well as existing employees? Why why do you think that hasn't happened? >> I think they have tried very hard to encourage it and use it and spread it. But I think there was just a few days ago a major expose in one of the major networks that the E-Verify system itself is completely flawed and employers who relied on E-Verify and who were told that these employees are legit and valid find out during the raid that maybe they were not authorized. So even I mean at the end of the day every single thing is subject to human manipulation and so you know I guess E- Verify is just as um full of flaws and may have some gaping holes. But again that is technically supposed to protect the employer but again I think in that particular incident they were like maybe this is a criminal investigation. So again, as I keep saying, obviously each case will have its own fact specific issues. >> I I I take your point about that every case being different, but I I assume in most cases, if you've been told by E- Verify that somebody is good to go, that's probably sufficient protection for the employer. >> That's my understanding. Yes. >> Okay. Let me ask you this. I've spoken with owners who've said to me that they have kind of a philosophical issue. They look at themselves as giving opportunities to people who might not otherwise be able to get them. Um, and this is again referring to people who they suspect may not be documented, but they're not really sure. They think they're doing a good thing by employing these people, but they also know that there are other people who might say you you're actually you're exploiting them by hiring them. That's the whole point of of this system. And I one owner in particular said to me, I I don't know which I am. Am I doing something good or am I exploiting? How would you answer that question? >> So again, it would depend, right? So if I'm getting bringing people who I know may like you said may not be legally authorized and I am paying them well below what the market would offer then yes I am exploiting them and taking advantage of their desperate situation. On the other hand, if for example, I know the going rate for let's say a grass cutter is whatever $25 an hour and I'm paying all these people 25 bucks an hour, maybe I'm not. I'm giving them great opportunities to to survive and succeed. But again, is that opportunity worth jeopardizing my life and my business? Uh, you know, those are like you said, philosophical, ideological, business, moral, you know, conscience sort of issues to consider, but It keeps coming back to each person, each situation. Because if I am paying that person, let I know the market is 25, but I'm actually paying 30 because I know these are poor people and they need this and they're sending a big portion of their money to Mexico or some other country. Now, maybe I am actually doing not just a good thing, but a great thing, but because I feel like I trust them more. They're hardworking. They're diligent. And I'm paying them at or above market rate. What if an owner were to say to you, "I'm paying these people above minimum wage, but I suspect they're undocumented, and I suspect that if I wanted to hire all documented employees, I would probably have to pay maybe $3 an hour more, but I don't think I can afford to do that. I don't think I can uh my business would survive." How does that change the calculation for you? So my calculation and my philosophy is the least important for as far as a business or a business owner or you know anything is concerned it's it's really at the end of the day as I always say uh as I tell my clients all the time Lauren is you are the one that has to make that decision. So if they say I can't survive if I pay, I would say figure out a way to make it because if I were you, I would try to follow the law, you know, because at the end of the day, you absolutely don't want to jeopardize your entire livelihood and your business to save a few bucks. Now, if you really are telling me seriously that you would shut down, maybe you need to figure out how to become more streamlined and efficient so you can pay the going wage and that extra three bucks rather than trying to do. Now, I've also had people tell me over the years, you know what, these some of these people are lazy, incompetent, they're drug addicts, they don't want to work. My immigrant labor on the other hand cares. They're work hard. They're diligent, you know. And I say, I hear you, but again, are you willing to jeopardize your business? Are you willing to have ICE agents knock on your door? What is important? And ultimately, you make those decisions. We can tell you as a lawyer, here's the law. Here's what's the to do. But I will never make a moral decision or moral judgment or place or tell you, you know what, you need to re replace your common sense or your business sense with my judgment of what's right and wrong. Sheila Murthy is founder and CEO of the Murthy Law Firm. Thank you so much, Miss Murthy. I apologize for keeping you longer than I said I would. Uh, but I think it's a really important conversation and I couldn't resist asking more questions. Thank you. >> It's a pleasure. It's an honor. Good luck with your wonderful podcast and continued success to you and all of your listeners. >> Thank you so much and have a great week, everyone. [Music]