Congressional hearing floats overturning landmark legal precedent protecting access to public schools

This week, congressional Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee organized a hearing calling into question Plyler v. Doe, a 1982 Supreme Court decision affirming the right of all students, regardless of immigration status, to attend public schools. The effort was led by Texas Congressman Chip Roy, who is currently campaigning in the Republican primary runoff for Texas Attorney General. Roy faces a steep fundraising deficit against his opponent, an oil and gas multimillionaire who has loaned his campaign roughly $14 million since launching.

"All students deserve access to a quality education that unlocks a better future for them and their families. That's the promise and the strength of public education, and it's why public schools are so often the hearts of their communities," said Zeph Capo, president of Texas AFT. "Toying with children's futures to win a primary election is the tactic of a small, sad man. Texas is far better off with kids in the classroom and Chip Roy out of elected office."

The federal government's immigration agenda has already had a chilling effect on public school students across the country. In Houston ISD, Texas's largest public school district, the immigrant student population has declined by 22% this school year, which amounts to almost 4,000 students.

Despite all the attacks on immigrant families, the U.S. Constitution still guarantees immigrant students access to a free public education. And, like other students, undocumented children are required under state law to attend school.

During this tumultuous time, below are some important reminders from our friends at the Intercultural Development Research Association (IDRA)

Schools must follow certain school enrollment procedures to avoid violation of the civil rights of immigrant children and their families:

• Focus on teaching all students.

• Proactively show parents and family that their students are welcome.

• Ensure teachers and staff are properly trained about protecting the rights of children and on cultural competency.

• Communicate with parents and family in their language.

• Share information about resources for students, families and educators (in English and other languages at the school).

• Proactively address bullying and harassment so all students, including immigrant students, feel safe and welcome in school. (See IDRA's toolkits.)

• Ensure law enforcement are not asked to handle routine discipline or administrative tasks. These tasks should not be part of their duties, are sometimes prohibited by state law, and may contribute to feelings of unease among some families.

All school personnel - especially principals and those involved with student registration and enrollment - should be aware that they have no legal obligation to enforce U.S. immigration laws.

• Public schools may not deny admission to a student during initial enrollment or at any other time on the basis of undocumented status.

• Schools cannot treat a student differently to determine residency.

• Schools cannot engage in any practices to "chill" the right of access to school.

• Schools cannot require students or parents to disclose or document their immigration status.

• Schools cannot make inquiries of students or parents intended to expose their undocumented status.

• And schools cannot require social security numbers from all students, as this may expose undocumented status.

Multilingual infographics are available from IDRA with pointers on how to welcome immigrant students in school. For a deep dive into the history of Plyler v. Doe, visit IDRA's website: Plyler v. Doe - The Law in Education.

Stay tuned for upcoming actions we can take to fight these ongoing attacks!