Limitations on Discovery Into Immigration Status
Another issue that arises in cases involving undocumented workers is whether an employer may use the discovery process in litigation to obtain information about the worker’s immigration status. Discovery allows the parties in a lawsuit to request documents, submit written questions, and take testimony that may relate to the claims or defenses in the case. The answer to this question is significant. If employers were generally permitted to investigate a worker’s immigration status during litigation, many undocumented workers might hesitate to pursue claims involving unpaid wages, discrimination, or retaliation.
California law addresses this concern directly. Labor Code section 1171.5(b) provides in part that “a person’s immigration status is irrelevant to the issue of liability, and in proceedings or discovery undertaken to enforce those state laws no inquiry shall be permitted into a person’s immigration status unless the person seeking to make this inquiry has shown by clear and convincing evidence that the inquiry is necessary in order to comply with federal immigration law.” In other words, immigration status is generally considered unrelated to whether an employer has violated state labor or employment laws.
The California Court of Appeal examined the scope of this rule in Manuel v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County (2022) 82 Cal.App.5th 719. In that case, the plaintiff alleged that he suffered a back injury while working for BrightView Landscape Services, Inc. After the incident, BrightView instructed him not to return to work. The plaintiff later filed suit against the company.
During the litigation, BrightView sought to compel the plaintiff to provide discovery responses and documents relating to whether he was legally authorized to work in the United States. The trial court granted the request. The plaintiff then sought review from the Court of Appeal through a writ petition.
The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s order. It concluded that Labor Code section 1171.5(b) barred the discovery requests seeking information about the plaintiff’s immigration status. The court explained that BrightView had not demonstrated, by clear and convincing evidence, that the requested information was necessary to comply with federal immigration law.
The court also noted that the plaintiff was not pursuing remedies that might require such information under federal law, such as reinstatement or back pay for a period after an employer discovered a worker’s lack of work authorization. Without that type of showing, the employer could not require the plaintiff to disclose immigration-related information during discovery.
Conclusion
California law places meaningful limits on attempts to obtain information about a worker’s immigration status during litigation. Under Labor Code section 1171.5(b), employers generally may not pursue discovery on that topic unless they can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the inquiry is necessary to comply with federal immigration law. These limitations reflect the state’s policy that workers should be able to pursue claims under employment and wage-and-hour laws without fear that their immigration status will become the focus of the case.
