← back to the Substrate Record

qid 1480 · law

Question: A state labor code provided that no employer in the state shall knowingly employ an alien who is not lawfully residing in the United States if such employment would have an adverse effect on lawful residents' right to work. A group of immigrant farm workers were continually refused employment contracts by the labor contractors in the state. Instead, the labor contractors had employed many alien workers since they would toil longer hours for less wages. The immigrant farm workers now bring suit in state court pursuant to the above-mentioned statutory provision. Which of the following determinations would most likely result as a consequence of the immigrant farm workers' lawsuit?

  1. The court would declare the statute unconstitutional as violative of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
  2. The court would declare the statute unconstitutional as it violates the rights of the alien workers.
  3. The court would declare the statute constitutional since it is within the state's power to regulate employment.
  4. The court would declare the statute constitutional as within the realm of rights reserved to the states by the Eleventh Amendment.
  5. The court would declare the statute unconstitutional as it discriminates against non-residents.
  6. The court would declare the statute unconstitutional as it conflicts with federal labor laws.
  7. The court would declare the statute constitutional as it does not infringe on the rights of the immigrant workers.
  8. The court would declare the statute constitutional as it promotes the welfare of the state's residents.
  9. The court would declare the statute constitutional since the states are not preempted in the area of economic regulation of illegal aliens.

Our answer: I. The court would declare the statute constitutional since the states are not preempted in the area of economic regulation of illegal aliens. Source quote machine-checked (exact quote)

A machine check confirms the quoted words appear at the source. A person has not yet reviewed these. EARN MARKS as a Human Reviewer

How it was answered

Stored method, replayed by code (kind: formula)

card: formula · card sha256 f52acfe927067c80…

Current source

Legal Information Institute (Cornell), De Canas v. Bica, 424 U.S. 351 (1976)

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/424/351

“California's attempt in § 2805(a) to prohibit the knowing employment by California employers of persons not entitled to lawful residence in the United States, let alone to work here, is certainly within the mainstream of such police power regulation.”

Source quote machine-checked (exact quote)

retrieved 2026-09-18T01:08:23.344Z

page text sha256 205bd8fee5f14c1d… · content sha256 9bc76fb6c4852be0…

addendum formula_qid1480.formula_ADDENDUM_source_rs20260918T010823Z · sha256 c705a863ebd3d5a9… · replaces the version below, addendum sha256 18d13a74e5fcf958…

Earlier version (superseded)

No public source has been found for this card yet (3 places checked internally).

addendum formula_qid1480.formula_ADDENDUM_source · sha256 18d13a74e5fcf958…

If you have a Citable Source to dispute or challenge this, ADD IT so we can correct the answer by appending, never deleting. — hello@lianabanyan.com