"No Sponsorship," "US Citizens Only," and "OPT Only": What DOJ IER Fines vs. Allows in Job Postings

What the 2023–2026 DOJ IER Settlement Ledger Shows

Federal citizenship-status enforcement targets two distinct errors: PERM green-card ads that deter U.S. applicants and public job postings restricted to specific citizenship or visa labels. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1324b, coverage starts at four employees—eleven hires earlier than Title VII.

Read the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division's Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (IER) enforcement ledger from November 2023 through August 2026. The settlement math is blunt. Hiring teams treat job-ad boilerplate like casual administrative copy. Federal prosecutors price it per unlawful posting and per deterred worker.

Break the verified DOJ IER docket into exact violation categories so your people operations audit fixes the right risk:

• PERM recruitment deterrence against U.S. workers. On November 9, 2023, Apple Inc. settled DOJ allegations for $25 million. That sum split into $6.75 million in civil penalties and an $18.25 million back-pay fund. DOJ found Apple's PERM labor-certification ads steered roles away from protected U.S. workers by leaving roles off its main external careers site and requiring paper applications. On August 4, 2026, OpenAI and Statsig resolved parallel PERM recruitment deterrence claims for a combined $3.2 million.
• Job ads preferring temporary visa holders. On April 7, 2026, Compunnel Software Group, Inc. paid $313,420—comprising $58,000 in back pay and $255,420 in civil penalties. The company published 53 or more job ads expressing unlawful preferences for temporary visa holders over protected U.S. workers.
• Unreviewed AI-generated job copy. In February 2026, Elegant Enterprise-Wide Solutions, Inc. paid a $9,460 civil penalty. One AI-generated job post solicited only H-1B and F-1 OPT applicants. Delegating the draft to an LLM saved zero liability.

Early-stage founders often assume federal anti-discrimination statutes wait until headcount hits 15 employees. Title VII waits until 15. The Immigration and Nationality Act rule at 8 U.S.C. § 1324b(a)(1)(B) and 28 CFR Part 44 covers every employer with four or more employees. A five-person seed startup posting its first engineering ad on LinkedIn falls inside DOJ IER jurisdiction on day one.

Why "US Citizens Only" and "Green Cards Only" Violate 8 U.S.C. § 1324b

Refugees and asylees hold permanent, unrestricted U.S. work authorization incident to status and never require employer visa sponsorship. Job ads stating "U.S. citizens only" or "citizens and Green Card holders only" unlawfully exclude them unless a statute or federal contract requires citizenship.

Most citizenship-status charges start with a completely lawful budget limit. A 30-person company has zero legal budget to file an H-1B petition. A busy hiring manager adds one line at the bottom of the job description: "Must be a U.S. citizen or Green Card holder—no sponsorship."

That single sentence violates federal law on its face. Read the statutory definition in 8 U.S.C. § 1324b(a)(3). Congress defined "protected individuals" for citizenship-status claims across five exact groups:

1. U.S. citizens.
2. U.S. nationals.
3. Lawful permanent residents (Green Card holders) who apply for naturalization within six months of eligibility.
4. Refugees admitted under 8 U.S.C. § 1157.
5. Asylees granted asylum under 8 U.S.C. § 1158.

Refugees and asylees are neither U.S. citizens nor Green Card holders yet. Even so, both groups hold indefinite, unrestricted U.S. work authorization incident to status. An employer never files a USCIS petition, pays a sponsorship fee, or signs a training plan to hire a refugee or an asylee. Writing "U.S. citizens and Green Card holders only" bars two protected classes without saving one dollar in legal fees.

Under 8 U.S.C. § 1324b(a)(2)(C), an employer may restrict a seat to U.S. citizens only when required by a federal, state, or local law, regulation, executive order, or federal government contract. Defense and space startups routinely blame the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) for "U.S. citizens only" postings. Check the actual text of 22 CFR § 120.62. ITAR defines a "U.S. person" to include U.S. citizens, nationals, lawful permanent residents, refugees, and asylees. Those are the exact five groups protected by § 1324b(a)(3). Unless an independent security clearance or federal contract mandates citizenship alone, ITAR never excuses a "U.S. citizens only" ad.

Why "OPT Only" Ads Fail—and How the Two-Question Safe Harbor Works

Soliciting "OPT, CPT, or H-1B candidates only" unlawfully excludes U.S. citizens, permanent residents, refugees, and asylees. Employers lawfully decline sponsorship by asking all applicants the exact two DOJ IER safe-harbor questions on current U.S. work authorization and current or future visa sponsorship.

The mirror-image violation runs in reverse. Some staffing vendors publish ads reading "Seeking F-1 OPT, CPT, or H-1B transfer candidates only." Under 8 U.S.C. § 1324b(a)(1)(B), reserving roles for temporary visa holders discriminates against protected U.S. citizens, permanent residents, refugees, and asylees. That is the exact offense fined in Compunnel Software Group and Elegant Enterprise-Wide Solutions. Even when teams backfill roles after H-1B layoffs and 60-day grace-period exits, job copy must stay neutral on citizenship and visa labels.

At the same time, federal law imposes zero duty to sponsor employment visas. F-1 OPT, STEM OPT, and H-1B holders are not "protected individuals" under § 1324b(a)(3). Across published DOJ IER Technical Assistance Letters (dated Aug. 6, 1998; Sept. 11, 2013; and Sept. 9, 2022), DOJ endorses a verbatim two-question safe harbor on job applications:

• Question 1: "Are you legally authorized to work in the United States?" (Yes / No.)
• Question 2: "Will you now or in the future require sponsorship for employment visa status (e.g., H-1B visa status)?" (Yes / No.)

The words "now or in the future" solve the entire screening problem cleanly. U.S. citizens, nationals, permanent residents, refugees, and asylees answer Yes to Question 1 and No to Question 2. An F-1 OPT or STEM OPT applicant holds temporary work authorization today but needs future sponsorship once that EAD expires. An employer with a consistent no-sponsorship rule may lawfully screen out anyone answering Yes to Question 2 without ever asking what visa or card an applicant holds.

Job-Ad Phrasing Audit Matrix and ATS Knock-Out Copy

Search your ATS templates, external job boards, agency intake sheets, and recruiter AI prompts for the six phrases below. Replace every status label with the verbatim DOJ IER safe-harbor text.

=== APPROVED ATS SCREENING QUESTIONS & JOB-AD DISCLOSURES ===
1. STANDARD ATS APPLICATION QUESTIONS (DOJ IER SAFE HARBOR):
   Q1: Are you legally authorized to work in the United States? [Yes / No].
   Q2: Will you now or in the future require sponsorship for employment visa
       status (e.g., H-1B visa status)? [Yes / No].

2. COMPLIANT JOB-DESCRIPTION FOOTER WHEN DECLINING SPONSORSHIP:
   "Applicants must be currently authorized to work in the United States.
   [Company] does not sponsor employment visa status (e.g., H-1B) now or in
   the future." [Never write "US citizens only" or "Green Cards only."]

3. COMPLIANT ITAR EXPORT-CONTROL DISCLOSURE (22 CFR § 120.62):
   "This role requires access to ITAR-controlled technical data. Candidates
   must qualify as a 'U.S. person' under 22 CFR § 120.62 (U.S. citizens,
   nationals, lawful permanent residents, refugees, and asylees) or qualify
   for an export license."

Dividing ATS Controls Across Recruiting, HR Ops, and Counsel

Informal recruiter notes and outside staffing vendors trigger as many DOJ IER investigations as corporate career sites. Assign template locks, agency audits, and PERM parity checks across three desks.