By Liz Nass
Gongwer News Service
The Michigan Immigrant Rights Center is gearing up for oral arguments on Wednesday in front of the Michigan Supreme Court to decide if Gov. Gretchen Whitmer can continue to apply a state policy that blocks worker's compensation for undocumented immigrants.
In a press conference on Monday, MIRC broke down the case that was first brought in 2021 to ensure undocumented immigrants that are injured at work receive worker's compensation. It was prompted by calls to their office of workers falling off roofs and being sprayed with pesticides.
nna Hill Galendez, managing attorney for MIRC, said these workers get no wages or have recourse. She told stories from one worker who could not work for a whole year after a tractor crushed his leg and likely will never make a full recovery and another mother of five who was unable to make ends meet for months when hit in the foot by a forklift.
"Many employers gladly hire workers who don't have work permits because they can pay them less and get away with more cutting corners on health and safety protections and when workers are inevitably injured, worker's compensation insurance companies know they can deny wage loss benefits without challenge," Hill Galendez said. "This is not only
devastating to injured workers and their families but encourages a race to the bottom where conscientious employers struggle to compete."
John Philo, attorney for the Sugar Law Center representing this case, said the bottom line is making sure that every worker in Michigan has the same right to worker's compensation,
because right now, undocumented workers are the one being punished the most.
The case focuses on Whitmer's role in enforcing the policy of the state not providing these resources, which David Muraskin, managing director for litigation at FarmSTAND, also representing MIRC, is "plainly unconstitutional" by violating governing U.S. Supreme Court law and is inconsistent with Michigan Supreme Court statements on worker's compensation.
Whitmer lost in the lower courts, but then won in the Court of Appeals, sending the case to the Supreme Court.
Muraskin also criticized Attorney General Dana Nessel by saying she tried to delay the case through procedural arguments on timeliness, which has become a key feature of the case, saying Whitmer is immune to the suit because it should have been brought one year since the policy was implemented.
The first time the issue was challenged was in 2003, which established this policy.
"That would mean that when the governor has a policy of any unconstitutional conduct, including this one, the fact that she got away with it for a year would keep anyone from ever going to court," Muraskin said. "It would keep people out of court if they had constitutional claims for their civil rights. It could even conceivably keep consumers out of court for their claims against companies. And she didn't only argue that, but she argued that she was entitled to immunity, meaning the courts could never hear this case."
Muraskin said no other state has a policy like this, so it was "shocking" that the Court of Appeals would rule in favor of the administration and that Whitmer could decide whether she wants to enforce the policy or not.
Phil Mayor, senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Michigan, said the case would not reverse any previous behavior, but would instead just force Whitmer to change the policy to open worker's compensation for all.
If MIRC succeeds in the Supreme Court, then the case would be remanded back to the Court of Appeals, but Muraskin said they would want to see this back down to the court of claims where it started.
The timeline for getting undocumented workers their compensation would be six months to two years because of the slow court system, Philo said.
"The state chose a pattern of really extraordinary and really exceptional delay techniques to avoid that decision from being heard, and you can take for that for what it's worth, but that's where we've arrived today to a court or a Supreme Court decision," Philo said. "The lower courts could act as quickly as they want once it's returned, but it may be several months before it's returned, and again, we would be pressing for quick decisions, but that is really in the hands of the court."
Muraskin said all the plaintiffs really want from Whitmer is to make a statement saying that "that this will no longer be the policy of the state of Michigan" and then "fix this going forward."
Whitmer's office did not respond to requests for comment at the time of publication.
Gongwer News Service
The Michigan Immigrant Rights Center is gearing up for oral arguments on Wednesday in front of the Michigan Supreme Court to decide if Gov. Gretchen Whitmer can continue to apply a state policy that blocks worker's compensation for undocumented immigrants.
In a press conference on Monday, MIRC broke down the case that was first brought in 2021 to ensure undocumented immigrants that are injured at work receive worker's compensation. It was prompted by calls to their office of workers falling off roofs and being sprayed with pesticides.
nna Hill Galendez, managing attorney for MIRC, said these workers get no wages or have recourse. She told stories from one worker who could not work for a whole year after a tractor crushed his leg and likely will never make a full recovery and another mother of five who was unable to make ends meet for months when hit in the foot by a forklift.
"Many employers gladly hire workers who don't have work permits because they can pay them less and get away with more cutting corners on health and safety protections and when workers are inevitably injured, worker's compensation insurance companies know they can deny wage loss benefits without challenge," Hill Galendez said. "This is not only
devastating to injured workers and their families but encourages a race to the bottom where conscientious employers struggle to compete."
John Philo, attorney for the Sugar Law Center representing this case, said the bottom line is making sure that every worker in Michigan has the same right to worker's compensation,
because right now, undocumented workers are the one being punished the most.
The case focuses on Whitmer's role in enforcing the policy of the state not providing these resources, which David Muraskin, managing director for litigation at FarmSTAND, also representing MIRC, is "plainly unconstitutional" by violating governing U.S. Supreme Court law and is inconsistent with Michigan Supreme Court statements on worker's compensation.
Whitmer lost in the lower courts, but then won in the Court of Appeals, sending the case to the Supreme Court.
Muraskin also criticized Attorney General Dana Nessel by saying she tried to delay the case through procedural arguments on timeliness, which has become a key feature of the case, saying Whitmer is immune to the suit because it should have been brought one year since the policy was implemented.
The first time the issue was challenged was in 2003, which established this policy.
"That would mean that when the governor has a policy of any unconstitutional conduct, including this one, the fact that she got away with it for a year would keep anyone from ever going to court," Muraskin said. "It would keep people out of court if they had constitutional claims for their civil rights. It could even conceivably keep consumers out of court for their claims against companies. And she didn't only argue that, but she argued that she was entitled to immunity, meaning the courts could never hear this case."
Muraskin said no other state has a policy like this, so it was "shocking" that the Court of Appeals would rule in favor of the administration and that Whitmer could decide whether she wants to enforce the policy or not.
Phil Mayor, senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Michigan, said the case would not reverse any previous behavior, but would instead just force Whitmer to change the policy to open worker's compensation for all.
If MIRC succeeds in the Supreme Court, then the case would be remanded back to the Court of Appeals, but Muraskin said they would want to see this back down to the court of claims where it started.
The timeline for getting undocumented workers their compensation would be six months to two years because of the slow court system, Philo said.
"The state chose a pattern of really extraordinary and really exceptional delay techniques to avoid that decision from being heard, and you can take for that for what it's worth, but that's where we've arrived today to a court or a Supreme Court decision," Philo said. "The lower courts could act as quickly as they want once it's returned, but it may be several months before it's returned, and again, we would be pressing for quick decisions, but that is really in the hands of the court."
Muraskin said all the plaintiffs really want from Whitmer is to make a statement saying that "that this will no longer be the policy of the state of Michigan" and then "fix this going forward."
Whitmer's office did not respond to requests for comment at the time of publication.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
