{"id":879,"date":"2022-01-31T10:58:12","date_gmt":"2022-01-31T15:58:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/?page_id=879"},"modified":"2025-05-12T11:10:09","modified_gmt":"2025-05-12T15:10:09","slug":"toward-an-inclusive-unemployment-insurance-fund-reimagining-income-replacement-in-california","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/in-print\/volume-36-number-1-fall-2021\/toward-an-inclusive-unemployment-insurance-fund-reimagining-income-replacement-in-california\/","title":{"rendered":"Toward an Inclusive Unemployment Insurance Fund: Reimagining Income Replacement in California"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">Unemployment Insurance (UI)\u2014ordinarily an unimposing social policy\u2014emerges in times of crisis as the boogeyman of financial dependence. Yet the program has become a foundational benefit of the COVID-19 pandemic and remains a vital safety net for crises to come. It is therefore imperative that UI broaden its reach to all who face the economic precarity of unemployment. To that end, this Note advocates for the creation of a state UI fund capable of servicing workers without documentation and provides the legal framework to do so. It first reflects on the eligibility boundaries of relief programs and the history of exclusionary benefit regimes. It then examines UI\u2019s legal and financial mechanics, looking backward at the program\u2019s formation, and forward toward the consequences of California\u2019s insolvency crisis. This analysis exposes UI\u2019s greatest limitations, all products of its technical design.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">As its core contribution, this Note charts the course for an inclusive income replacement scheme with the reinforcement to withstand both privacy and preemption implications. The proposal designates a percentage of income taxes toward a separate revenue pool that operates entirely independent of, but mechanically comparable to, the existing infrastructure. To prevent the fund from transforming into a registry, the proposal contemplates a secure means of <\/span><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">data-sharing, insulated from nefarious inquiries and probes. The Note analyzes sanctuary laws through the lens of federal preemption to propose new state policy that can further protect immigration data. It also explores litigation channels by applying the Tenth Amendment\u2019s anti-commandeering doctrine to existing federal immigration law. After making the case for legal viability, this Note concludes by emphasizing the growing political appetite for such a proposal, as demonstrated by New York\u2019s Excluded Workers Fund.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Continue reading <a href=\"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/19\/2022\/01\/GT-GILJ210010.pdf\"><strong>Toward an Inclusive Unemployment Insurance Fund: Reimagining Income Replacement in California<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n<a href=\"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/19\/2022\/01\/GT-GILJ210010.pdf\" class=\"pdfemb-viewer\" style=\"\" data-width=\"max\" data-height=\"max\" data-toolbar=\"bottom\" data-toolbar-fixed=\"off\">GT-GILJ210010<\/a>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Unemployment Insurance (UI)\u2014ordinarily an unimposing social policy\u2014emerges in times of crisis as the boogeyman of financial dependence. Yet the program has become a foundational benefit of the COVID-19 pandemic and [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1019,"featured_media":0,"parent":823,"menu_order":9,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"abstract.php","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_price":"","_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_header":"","_tribe_default_ticket_provider":"","_tribe_ticket_capacity":"0","_ticket_start_date":"","_ticket_end_date":"","_tribe_ticket_show_description":"","_tribe_ticket_show_not_going":false,"_tribe_ticket_use_global_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_global_stock_level":"","_global_stock_mode":"","_global_stock_cap":"","_tribe_rsvp_for_event":"","_tribe_ticket_going_count":"","_tribe_ticket_not_going_count":"","_tribe_tickets_list":"[]","_tribe_ticket_has_attendee_info_fields":false,"footnotes":"","_tec_slr_enabled":"","_tec_slr_layout":""},"class_list":["post-879","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"ticketed":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/879","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1019"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=879"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/879\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":891,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/879\/revisions\/891"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/823"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/immigration-law-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=879"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}