Hearing Ends in Test of New Alien Worker Law by El Cajon Firm

Testimony concluded Friday in the ground-breaking case of an El Cajon water bed manufacturer accused of hiring undocumented workers in violation of the new federal immigration law.

The hearing was the first such session in the nation, and may set precedents for future cases brought by the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service.

“We’re breaking new ground,” Peter Larrabee, attorney for the defendant, Mester Manufacturing, said before the case began.

Although testimony ended Friday in the 3 1/2-day hearing, a decision is not expected for at least two months.

Presiding over the case was Marvin H. Morse, a 58-year-old longtime administrative law judge who was appointed by William Tyson, chief administrative hearing officer for the U.S. attorney general.

“I think it’s a fascinating area of law, and a great challenge,” said Morse, based in Falls Church, Va. He worked most recently as an administrative law judge with the Small Business Administration.

Now that the hearing is over, Morse will return to Virginia to study the case record and review additional briefs that are to be submitted by each side.

Mester Manufacturing was fined $6,000 in October on charges of violating a section of the immigration law that prohibits employers from “knowingly” hiring illegal aliens. This so-called “employer sanction” provision--designed to dry up the job market for undocumented workers--is a cornerstone of the landmark immigration statute that was signed into law Nov. 6, 1986.

Mester, which employs about 70 people in El Cajon and does between $3 million and $4 million in annual sales, was the first firm in California to be fined under the law. At the time the fine was announced, INS Western regional commissioner Harold Ezell called it “a very significant day for us.” Since then, the INS has fined about 2 dozen other firms nationwide, many of which are seeking similar hearings.

The INS charged Mester in a 17-count complaint that named 13 illegal aliens who allegedly were employed by the firm. Mester contested the fine, precipitating this week’s hearing.

During the sometimes-tedious hearing, Larrabee contended the INS had failed to show that the firm had ever knowingly hired undocumented workers, and he charged that the agency unfairly targeted his client. Larrabee, himself a former INS official, repeatedly attacked the new law’s regulatory guidelines, calling them shoddy, incomplete and ambiguous.

“There’s a loose cannon on the ship known as employer sanctions,” Larrabee said at one point.

Martin D. Soblick, the INS attorney, countered that agency procedures make it relatively easy for employers to comply with the law. The INS charged that Mester Manufacturing continued to ignore the law despite repeated warnings and several visits from agency personnel.

Among the nine witnesses was Barry Mester, the 27-year-old company president, who began the firm 9 years ago in his garage. He denied any wrongdoing.

Afterward, Soblick was hesitant to predict that the case could set precedent, even though it was the first such hearing in the nation.

“Each case rises and falls on its own merits,” Soblick said, “but this does for the first time hash out some issues we haven’t dealt with in a court hearing.”

But Kitty Calavita, a research associate at the UC San Diego Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies, described the case as significant.

“This is important because it provides a hint of what will be coming,” said Calavita, who has done extensive research on immigration and was present for much of the hearing, which was held in a courtroom at U.S. District Court in San Diego.

Morse can find for either side; he can impose a civil fine of up to $6,000 on Mester Manufacturing if he finds it at fault. Morse’s ruling can later be appealed to the office of the chief administrative hearing officer.