Using a Fake Green Card to Work in the United States: What Happens If an Investigation Begins?
An employer accepted your documents, hired you, and is paying your wages. Does that mean questions about those documents can no longer arise?
No. An employer’s acceptance does not make a fake green card lawful or protect a worker from potential liability for knowingly using it. Federal law separately addresses employment verification and the misuse of documents submitted during that process.
The Viva Supermarkets case in California illustrates how employment document fraud can become part of a federal criminal prosecution. However, the manager’s conviction and the potential consequences for individual workers must be assessed separately.
Fake Green Card Use at Viva Supermarkets: What Happened?
On October 14, 2026, a federal jury found Karla Montoya, 45, the general manager of the Sacramento-area Viva Supermarkets chain, guilty of immigration document fraud, obstruction of two federal labor investigations, and conspiracy.
According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Montoya knowingly accepted counterfeit green cards and Social Security cards when hiring employees. The case also involved her own false immigration documents. She helped facilitate off-the-books payments and practices that deprived workers of overtime pay.
Montoya and the chain’s owner obstructed two Department of Labor investigations, including by hiding employees who could provide unfavorable information. That obstruction caused an earlier investigation to substantially understate the back wages owed.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office announcement scheduled Montoya’s sentencing for January 7, 2027. A guilty verdict and sentencing are separate events; the announcement did not report a sentence already imposed.
The announcement does not say that all of the chain’s employees were convicted or deported. It cannot support that conclusion.
What Can Happen During an Employment Document Check?
One route is a Form I-9 inspection, in which authorities examine an employer’s compliance with identity and employment authorization verification requirements.
According to ICE’s description of the inspection process, it can include:
A request for employment records. In a standard administrative inspection, employers generally receive at least three business days to produce Forms I-9 and requested supporting records.
Review of the forms and documents. Investigators examine the information recorded during hiring and any supporting documents provided.
Notice of possible document problems. ICE may issue a Notice of Suspect Documents if it determines that documents do not relate to the employee or are otherwise invalid for employment. The process provides an opportunity to submit additional evidence concerning employment eligibility.
These are features of the administrative inspection process, not a description of every criminal investigation or worksite enforcement action.
If an employer knows that a worker lacks authorization for the job, federal law generally prohibits continuing that employment under 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(a)(2). This employment consequence is separate from whether a worker committed a document offense.
Which Federal Laws Address Fake Employment Documents?
Two provisions are particularly relevant:
18 U.S.C. § 1546(a) covers specified conduct involving false immigration documents, including knowingly using, possessing, obtaining, accepting, or receiving covered documents with knowledge of their fraudulent nature.
18 U.S.C. § 1546(b) addresses using false or unlawfully issued identification documents, or a false attestation, to satisfy employment verification requirements. For the document provisions, the statute includes knowing or having reason to know of the problem. A violation can carry a fine, imprisonment for up to five years, or both.
These provisions have specific elements that prosecutors must establish. A statutory maximum is not a prediction of the sentence in an individual case.
Lacking work authorization and using fraudulent documents are different legal issues. An individual assessment must examine what the person submitted, what they knew, and what statements they made.
Does an Employer’s Acceptance of a Fake Green Card Protect the Worker?
An employer’s willingness to accept fake documents does not create an exception to the federal document offenses. The worker’s conduct must be assessed under the applicable statute.
Employers have their own obligations. 8 U.S.C. § 1324a prohibits knowingly hiring unauthorized workers and requires employment verification. An employer’s liability and a worker’s potential liability therefore require separate analysis.
Montoya’s conviction does not establish that every employee committed the same offenses.
Does a Real Social Security Number Authorize Employment?
A genuine Social Security number does not, by itself, establish unrestricted authorization to work.
The Social Security Administration issues different types of cards, including cards bearing these restrictions:
VALID FOR WORK ONLY WITH DHS AUTHORIZATION — employment requires authorization from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
NOT VALID FOR EMPLOYMENT — the card does not establish employment authorization.
SSA also issues unrestricted cards to U.S. citizens and people lawfully admitted for permanent residence. The number, the card’s restrictions, and the person’s immigration status and employment authorization must be considered together.
What Should You Do If You Have Already Used Fake Documents?
Consult an attorney who can assess both the criminal and immigration aspects of the situation. Explain precisely:
Which documents you submitted and whether they used another person’s identity.
What you knew about the documents.
What you stated on Form I-9 and other hiring paperwork.
Whether you or your employer have received an inspection notice or questions from investigators.
Saying “I was just working” does not provide enough information to assess potential document offenses or other consequences.
The Viva Supermarkets case shows why an employer’s acceptance of documents cannot establish their legality. The consequences for an individual worker depend on that person’s conduct and circumstances.
This material is for informational purposes and is not a substitute for individual legal advice.
Comments