photo by: Associated Press

Donaldo Morales, left, and his wife Isleen Gimenez Morales, right, pose for a photograph at an attorney's office in Kansas City, Mo., Tuesday, Sept. 17, 2019. (AP Photo/Orlin Wagner)

Story updated at 3:20 p.m. Friday

The Kansas Supreme Court on Friday upheld two state identity theft convictions following a decision by the nation’s highest court that made it easier for states to prosecute immigrants who use fake Social Security numbers to secure employment.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in March that nothing in federal immigration law prevents states from going after immigrants who use phony documents and numbers.

The cases arose out of Johnson County, Kansas, a largely suburban area outside Kansas City, Missouri, where the district attorney has aggressively pursued immigrants under state identity theft and false-information statutes.

In brief rulings Friday, the Kansas Supreme Court acknowledged that it shouldn’t have reviewed the convictions of Donaldo Morales and Ramiro Garcia. It vacated its earlier decision that overturned the convictions by concluding that the federal government has exclusive authority to determine whether an immigrant may work in the United States.

Kansas appealed that determination, and the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the state.

This time, the Kansas high court affirmed their convictions.

“Once the Supreme Court of the United States had made its ruling, at that point we could predict what the Kansas Supreme Court was going to do,” said defense attorney Rekha Sharma-Crawford. “I am not sure anyone was really surprised what they did in light of the Supreme Court of the United States.”

She said they are considering their legal options.

Morales, who has been living in the United States since 1989, was found guilty of state charges for identity theft and putting false information on employment forms related to his work at a restaurant.

After Garcia got a speeding ticket on his way to his restaurant job, a local detective and a federal agent checked his employment paperwork. His attorneys told the court that the federal government didn’t charge Garcia because he was cooperating with an investigation into a previous employer suspected of directing employees to change Social Security numbers. The local district attorney nonetheless charged him with identity theft, and pursued the state case even after Garcia obtained lawful immigration status.