Listen to the article
Georgia GOP Gubernatorial Candidate Rick Jackson Under Fire for Contradictory Statements on Hiring Practices
Republican gubernatorial hopeful Rick Jackson is facing intense scrutiny in Georgia’s primary race after making contradictory statements about employment verification practices at his companies, particularly regarding the potential hiring of undocumented immigrants.
During a recent debate, Jackson struggled when fellow Republican frontrunner Lt. Gov. Burt Jones directly asked if he employs illegal immigrants. “I don’t know,” Jackson responded, explaining he wasn’t directly involved in the hiring process. He claimed those making hires for him “obey the laws” and use appropriate federal verification measures.
However, these statements directly contradicted Jackson’s own testimony in a previous worker’s compensation lawsuit. In a sworn deposition, Jackson had admitted his companies did not use the federally mandated I-9 forms to verify employment eligibility. When specifically asked in the deposition if he performed employment verification through the I-9 system, Jackson replied, “No.”
The contradiction has provided ammunition for Jackson’s political opponents. Political strategist Phil Vangelakos didn’t mince words: “Rick Jackson is lying to someone. Either he lied in his deposition under oath or he lied to Georgians on the debate stage. It’s pretty clear that he knows he’s employed illegal immigrants.”
Georgia Tea Party activist Debbie Dooley similarly criticized Jackson, calling him “a fraud that will say what he needs to in order to win and is pretending to be a Trump Conservative, when in fact, he is a Bush moderate.” She added, “He campaigns against illegals, yet he hires them.”
The controversy stems from court documents first reported by the New York Post prior to Monday’s debate. The worker’s compensation lawsuit involved Jackson Investment Group, LLC, and JIG Real Estate, LLC – both companies where Jackson serves as CEO.
According to filings from the case, Jackson “maintained a long-standing workforce of multiple laborers performing landscaping and property maintenance work for decades, including individuals without work authorization who nonetheless performed continuous employment for the employer.”
The Jones campaign quickly capitalized on Jackson’s debate performance with an attack ad highlighting the discrepancy. “No I-9’s, no background checks for decades,” states the ad’s narrator before playing the debate exchange. “He knew. He’s not just hiring illegal immigrants, he’s lying to Georgians.”
Immigration enforcement has become a critical issue in Georgia’s Republican primary, particularly as border security remains a top concern for conservative voters nationwide. The controversy threatens to undermine Jackson’s conservative credentials in a competitive field that also includes Attorney General Chris Carr and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger.
Jackson’s campaign has pushed back against the criticism, attempting to redirect attention to Jones. A campaign spokesperson stated, “The takeaway from the debate is the universal agreement that Burt Jones has used his office corruptly to enrich himself and attack his political opponents.” They claimed many critics are affiliated with Jones’ campaign.
The spokesperson also clarified that Jackson was referring to his healthcare company in the debate, which “has used E-Verify since 2012,” and insisted Jackson “would never knowingly hire someone in the country illegally.” They emphasized that as governor, Jackson would make Georgia “No. 1 in criminal illegal deportations.”
The primary election is scheduled for May 19, giving voters just weeks to evaluate the candidates’ positions and credibility on immigration and other key issues. With multiple Republican frontrunners competing, the controversy could significantly influence the outcome in what has become an increasingly contentious race.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.


14 Comments
This story highlights the need for strict enforcement of immigration and employment laws. Voters will likely want to know the full details behind the candidate’s hiring practices.
This is a concerning development that could undermine the candidate’s credibility. Voters will want to know the full truth behind these employment claims.
Transparency and accountability around hiring practices are crucial for political figures. Contradictions like these erode public trust.
The discrepancies in the candidate’s statements are troubling and could undermine public trust. Voters will want to see a clear, unwavering stance on employment verification.
Honesty and transparency around employment verification are essential for political candidates. The discrepancies in this case merit further scrutiny.
Voters should demand clear and consistent stances from candidates on issues like this. Contradictory statements raise red flags.
The candidate’s responses are puzzling and warrant closer examination. Compliance with labor laws should be a top priority for anyone seeking public office.
This appears to be a complex issue with contradictory statements from the candidate. It will be interesting to see how this plays out and if the discrepancies in his employment practices are addressed.
Candidates should be held accountable for any contradictions or lack of transparency around hiring practices, especially when it comes to legal compliance.
Verification of employee eligibility is an important issue, and the candidate’s responses seem concerning. Voters will want a clear and consistent position on this matter.
It’s critical that political candidates adhere to labor laws and are upfront about their hiring practices. Anything less raises questions about their integrity.
This story highlights the importance of closely scrutinizing candidates’ claims, especially when it comes to legal compliance. Voters deserve straight answers on these matters.
Consistency and honesty are essential qualities for political leaders. Contradictions on hiring practices are concerning and warrant further investigation.
The candidate’s shifting statements on this issue raise eyebrows. Voters will expect a clear, consistent, and lawful approach to employment verification.