Who is allowed to work in the United States—and under what conditions—has long been shaped by the intersections of immigration and employment law. While these questions are frequently in the national spotlight today, the complex layers and legal frameworks behind them have been evolving for decades.
Recognizing both the historical significance and modern urgency of these issues, Syracuse University College of Law launched its first JDinteractive (JDi) residency focused on the interweaving of immigration and employment statutes and regulations, drawing students eager to explore how policy, economics, and legal precedent converge.
The Intersections of Immigration and Employment Policy and Law: In the Courts, the Agencies, and in the Congress, a four-day residency option designed for JDi students and open to on-campus students, took place last December in Washington, D.C. This popular residency drew a diverse group of students— including a union steward, a sheriff, an individual with an H-1B visa, and many other professionals working in a variety of fields—all of whom brought interesting perspectives to the classroom.
The residency was led by the Hon. Randel Johnson, Chair and Chief Judge, Administrative Review Board, U.S. Department of Labor (presenting on his own behalf) and a distinguished immigration law scholar with more than 25 years of experience working in immigration and employment law on Capitol Hill, with the Department of Labor, and in the private sector.
Curriculum Addressed Broader Immigration/Employment Issues
According to Johnson, the residency was not designed to concentrate on immigration under the current administration, although those issues were certainly discussed. Instead, it offered a much broader perspective, looking at how conflicts between the courts and enforcement agencies are resolved using a review of general statutory interpretative principles and court cases that examine the interactions of immigration and employment laws. The residency also examined other legal conflicts as exemplified under the Federal Arbitration Act; the congressional deliberations surrounding the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act; and the Administrative Procedure Act, well as some of the more influential court decisions handed down over the past six years, such as Loper Bright, v. Raimondo, SEC v. Jarkesy, and Muldrow v. City of St. Louis.
“This residency clarified that immigration law, employment law, and administrative law do not operate as separate systems but continuously shape one another— and that their interaction has long-term consequences beyond individual cases,” says attendee Kate Fioravanti L’26, who is a full-time school administrator in a Connecticut urban public school district and the president of the local union affiliate of the AFL-CIO.
“Through discussion of doctrines like Hoffman Plastics, mandatory arbitration, agency deference, and cases such as Plyler v. Doe, the course highlighted how legal rules governing work authorization, enforcement, and access to institutions ultimately influence who participates in the workforce, who remains economically stable, and how communities develop,” she says. “For me, the important takeaway was understanding how these legal frameworks collectively affect the country’s labor force, schools, and economic capacity, making them questions of structural design rather than isolated doctrinal debates.”
Jacie Rodriguez L’26 also found the residency enlightening.
“The best thing I took away was that immigration policies and laws are not simple,” says Rodriguez, a bilingual claims specialist for the U.S. Social Security Administration. “There are many parties invested in the outcome of immigration law, and reform can come to a near standstill without compromise. Policymakers, administrative agencies, Supreme Court decisions, public interest groups, and the president himself—everyone has a role that will either stagnate or propel momentum.”
Extensive Network of Speakers Added Unique Expertise
Not only did Johnson utilize case studies and examples from his extensive career in immigration and employment law, but he also tapped into his vast network of experts in this space to speak to and network with the JDi students, adding to the richness of the experience.
“I’m blessed to have such a huge network of professional colleagues—and I’m grateful they took time out of their very busy lives to share their views and experiences with our JDi students,” says Johnson. “When I was going through the students’ final exams, everyone identified different speakers and their appeal, as well as the opportunity to hear about various career backgrounds and, to some degree, think about post-graduation opportunities outside of big law.”
Students left the residency with a greater knowledge and understanding of U.S. immigration and employment law, including the layered complexities within each area. They also gained insight into how courts resolve seemingly inconsistent mandates between statutes, and how to effectively advocate for clients when confronted with conflicting and/or overlapping mandates. They further honed their skills by analyzing immigration law cases and looked closely at how trends shape the law and Congressional deliberations.
“I believe the JDi students walked away with a sense of how this topic is more than just today’s headlines but is a blend of the law and societal mores, and that, as these societal mores change, the law does not remain static,” adds Johnson. “The skills shared at the residency are transferable to a lot of other aspects of the legal field. So no matter what area of the law they choose to pursue, I hope the experience gave them another arrow in their quiver as they go through life and represent clients.”
Residency Welcomes High-Level Thought Leaders
The following joined the JDi residency to share their expertise on various topics related to immigration and employment law.
- Jon Baselice, Executive Vice President and Head of Government Affairs, Vantoe, explained negotiations over the worker program in S. 744 and why employers were quite willing to overrule Hoffman while unions thought it would be a win
- Josh Bernstein, Director of Immigration Policy/Director of Immigration for the Service Employees International Union SEIU, U.S. Chamber, immigration programs, spoke about immigration policy, Capitol Hill negations with the U.S. Chamber, and immigrant worker programs
- Joshua Breisblatt, Democrat Chief Counsel, Immigration Subcommittee, U.S. House Judiciary Committee: Immigration negotiations on Capitol Hill.
- Kristie De Pena, Vice President for Policy and Director of Immigration Policy, Niskanene Center, gave an update and observations on recent immigration developments and chance of reforms
- Danny Kaufer, Partner, Borden Ladner Gervais, Montreal, spoke about lessons and parallels under Canadian employment law
- Roger King, Senior Labor and Employment Counsel for the HR Policy Association, presented the basics of the NLRA and crossroads with immigration law.
- Camilla Olson, Partner, Seyfarth Shaw, and Chair, U.S. Chamber’s EEO subcommittee, presented on statutory overlaps.
- Laura Reiff, Shareholder at Greenberg Traurig and Co-chair of GT’s Immigration Practice, talked about union management negotiations and compliance issues
- Gene Scalia, past Secretary of Labor and Solicitor of Labor, explained the balancing legal interpretations of statutes and review of key Supreme Court decisions relating to the APA
- Chris Thomas, Partner, Holland & Hart, spoke about immigration enforcement focus and practical problems faced by employers