[staytrue]

the MINIMUM expected of a lawbreaker is to make restitution for the money involved. For employers, that means the fines should be AT LEAST an amount equal to the monetary benefit they received from the illegal workers labor.

Your argument is off base. Criminals are supposed to make restitution to a victim who suffered a loss. Here if an illegal does not use govt. services, no one has suffered a loss. The employer gains, the illegal gains, the govt. even gains via more taxes on a higher profit.

Further, even if an illegal uses govt. services, it will be a stretch to charge an employer. It would be like a citizen works at a 7-11, takes his paycheck to buy a gun, shoots someone and asking the 7-11 to make restitution.

So I find your restitution comment to be without merit.

[Kellis91789]

We are talking about MONETARY restitution for a MONETARY crime. So your 7-11 strawman is garbage.

"Here if an illegal does not use govt. services, no one has suffered a loss."

This is not true. All the other employees that suffered a depressed wage are victims of the employer's action. All the people that paid higher auto-insurance because illegals didn't are victims. All the people that paid higher health-care costs because illegals used private hospital emergency rooms without paying are victims.

There are a myriad of ways that these employers have shifted a monetary burden onto society at large, not just government-provided services.