Undocumented Immigrant Students Protected by Plyler v. Doe Ruling
Students began asking questions soon after President Donald Trump took office.
'How old do I have to be to adopt my siblings?' an area student asked a teacher, worried that their parents could be deported.
'Can I attend school virtually?' asked another student, reasoning that they would be safer from being targeted by immigration agents if they studied online at home.
Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter
A straight-A student from a South American country stunned and saddened her teacher by saying, 'So when are they going to send me back?'
'Can I borrow a laminator?' asked another, who wanted to make a stack of 'Know Your Rights' flyers sturdier. High schoolers have been passing the guides out, informing people what to do if stopped and questioned about immigration status.
Trump campaigned on a vow to deport millions of undocumented immigrants, boasting of mass deportations.
What that might mean for the children of targeted immigrants, or whether they would be rounded up, has been the subject of speculation, rumor and fear.
In early March, the Trump administration began detaining families at a Texas center, with the intention of deporting the children and adults together.
Kansas City area school districts are responding, training teachers and staff on protocols in case immigration agents try to enter a school and sending notices to parents.
'Not every school district, not every charter school, not every private school, has addressed the issue,' said Christy J. Moreno with Revolución Educativa, a Kansas City nonprofit advocating for Latinos' educational success.
Parents in some local schools have had their fears calmed through district communication.
'There have been some districts that have been a little bit more public about their stance on this, but in general terms, they're not being very public,' said Moreno, an advocacy and impact officer. 'It's because of all the executive orders and the fear that federal funding will be taken away.'
Indeed, when asked to comment, most area districts declined or pointed to district policy posted online.
Immigrant children's right to attend public school, K-12, is constitutionally protected.
A 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Plyler v. Doe, guarantees it regardless of immigration status.
The Plyler ruling also ensures that schools do not ask the immigration status of children as they enroll, something that area districts have emphasized in communication to parents.
The Shawnee Mission School District relies on policies that are the responsibility of building administrators if any external agency, such as law enforcement, requests access to or information about a student.
'We strongly believe that every child deserves free and unfettered access to a quality public education, regardless of immigration status,' said David A. Smith, chief communications officer, in a statement. 'While we cannot control the actions of others, we can control how we respond.'
Schools were once understood to be off limits for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Schools were considered to be 'sensitive places,' along with hospitals and places of worship.
Trump rescinded that nearly 14-year-old policy by executive order immediately upon taking office in January.
In February, the Denver Public Schools sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, arguing that the schools' duty to educate students was hindered by the change.
Students were missing school out of fear, the Colorado educators said. And administrators and teachers were forced to redirect resources to train staff on how to react in case immigration agents entered school grounds.
On March 7, a federal judge sided with Homeland Security in denying the injunction.
The ruling gleaned some clarity for schools, with the government noting that the current policy requires 'some level of approval on when to conduct an action' in a school.
But that guardrail doesn't negate anxieties, the judge acknowledged.
In the Kansas City area, one mother, with two children in public school, indicated that her district's support was too hesitant.
'I know that the districts at this time have not come out in support of immigrant families in these difficult times,' she said. 'They are just being very diplomatic, saying that education comes first.'
Plyler v. Doe isn't as universally understood as Brown v. Board of Education.
The U.S. Supreme Court case guaranteeing immigrant children's right to a public K-12 education is a landmark decision, said Rebeca Shackleford, director of federal government relations for All4Ed, a national nonprofit advocating for educational equity.
'Kids are losing out already, even though they still have their right to this education,' Shackleford said. 'There are kids who are not in school today because their parents are holding them back.'
The class-action case originated in Texas.
In 1975, the state legislature said school districts could deny enrollment to children who weren't 'legally admitted' into the U.S., withholding state funds for those children's education.
Two years later, the Tyler district decided to charge $1,000 tuition to Mexican students who couldn't meet the legally admitted requirement. James Plyler was the superintendent of the Tyler Independent School District.
The case was brought by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
Lower courts ruled for the children and their parents, noting that the societal costs of not educating the children outweighed the state's harm. The lower courts also ruled the state could not preempt federal immigration law.
Eventually the case was taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court, which in 1982 upheld the rights of the students to receive a K-12 education, 5-4, citing the 14th Amendment's equal-protection clause.
'By denying these children a basic education,' the court said, 'we deny them the ability to live within the structure of our civic institutions, and foreclose any realistic possibility that they will contribute in even the smallest way to the progress of our Nation.'
The court also said that holding children accountable for their parents' actions 'does not comport with fundamental conceptions of justice.'
There have been efforts by state legislatures to challenge the ruling.
In 2011, Alabama saw a dramatic drop in Latino student attendance, even among U.S.-born children, when the state ordered districts to determine the immigration status of students as they enrolled.
The law was later permanently blocked by a federal court.
Tennessee is currently debating passage of a law similar to the Texas law that led to the Plyler ruling.
The proposed law would allow districts to charge undocumented students tuition, and would require districts to check the legal status of students as they enrolled.
The bill recently passed out of an education committee.
The chilling effect of such proposals, like current calls for mass deportations, can be widespread for children, advocates said.
'How can you learn if you're worried about whether or not your parents are going to be home when you get home from school?' Shackleford said.
Teachers nationwide are seeing the impact as students worry for themselves, their parents and friends.
'I think sometimes we forget that the words that we use as adults and the messages that we send are affecting our kids,' Shackleford, a former teacher, said. 'And no one feels that more than teachers and classroom educators, because they're right there in the rooms and hearing this and seeing the pain of their students.'
Voids in information leave room for misinformation, which is quickly spread by social media.
Local advocates for immigrant rights have been tamping down rumors about raids, especially in regard to schools.
There have not been any reported incidents involving ICE agents inside or on local K-12 school grounds.
But in February, a man was detained near a Kansas City school, presumably as he was getting ready to drop a child off for the day's lessons.
Homeland Security officials arrested a man they said had previously been deported. Staff of the Guadalupe Centers Elementary & Pre-K School acted quickly, escorting the child into the building.
For districts, managing communications can be a balance.
North Kansas City Schools began getting questions from parents about ICE and Customs and Border Protection early this year.
On Jan. 24, the district sent a notice to parents emphasizing policies that had been in place for several years.
'In general, law enforcement has the same limited level of access to student records as members of the public with no special permissions,' according to the notice. 'Law enforcement agents are not permitted to speak with nor interact with students without a valid subpoena, court order or explicit parent permission unless it's an emergency situation.'
Kansas City Public Schools Superintendent Jennifer Collier addressed immigration in a late January board meeting.
Collier said that work had begun 'behind the scenes' after Trump rescinded the sensitive-places policy.
'What we didn't want to do was to get out front and begin to alarm everybody, to create anxiety,' Collier said, noting the 'feelings of heaviness and in some cases feelings of hopelessness.'
All staff would be trained, including legal and security teams, in identifying valid court orders or warrants.
She emphasized the emotional well-being of students. And the district has posted guidance online.
'We're going to make it to the other side of this,' Collier told her board. 'So hold on. Don't lose hope.'
This article first appeared on Beacon: Kansas City and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Our View: Republicans, Democrats scheming on mid-term elections
Two wrongs don't make a right. It's wrong that at the urging of President Trump, Texas Republicans are scheming to redrawn political boundaries to dilute the power of minorities and Democratic voters in next year's mid-term elections. It's wrong that California Democrats, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom, now are scheming to usurp the will of California voters and reshape the state's political boundaries to block Texas Republicans from gaming the congressional elections. For many, this may seem like boring insider political baseball. But the scheming shows how politicians care less about the people they represent at home and more about retaining the power of their political parties — Republican and Democratic — in Washington. The scheming we now see is a shameful corruption of democracy and the electoral system politicians claim they support. At its heart is control of the House of Representatives. The House of Representatives has 435 members — each representing about the same number of constituents. Every 10 years, after completion of a U.S. Census, allocation of a state's share of House seats is decided and the political boundary lines of congressional districts within the states are adjusted. In most states, such as Texas, state politicians and their donor buddies scheme on adjusting district boundary lines to protect incumbents and assure a political party's election. That's called gerrymandering. Texas Republicans are not waiting for the next 10-year census to redraw district lines. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has called the Republican-dominated Legislature back into a special session to consider a new political map that shifts district lines and is designed to elect more Republicans to Congress. If all goes as the schemers hope, Texas Republicans could pick up five additional seats in next year's mid-term elections. That would be a big deal in the House, where Republicans now hold a slim majority. Democratic takeover of the House would apply the brakes on Trump's controversial agenda. And that's where California Gov. Newsom comes in. He's scheming on a plan to fight fire with fire. Redraw California's political boundary lines before next year's mid-term elections to advantage Democratic candidates. That could shrink California's nine-member Republican delegation to three or four. But there is a catch. In 2010, California voters, who were fed up with self-dealing politicians, overwhelmingly passed a ballot measure that created a bipartisan independent redistricting commission. No longer could the state's politicians draw their own district lines. In 2011 and 2021, the commission drew district lines, with a focus on creating competitive districts, within coherent geographic areas, containing voters with shared interests, and providing representations for minority communities. Both Democratic and Republican parties, refusing to quietly give up their power, strongly opposed creation of a bipartisan independent commission in 2010. To accomplish his mid-term scheme, Newsom would have to quickly call a statewide special election — at a cost of what some estimate to be $200 million — and ask voters to return redistricting power to self-serving politicians. Fat chance voters would go along with that. As an alternative, Newsom and his co-conspirators are considering crawling through an imaginary loophole in the law that created the bipartisan independent redistricting commission. They reason that since the law voters created only called for an independent commission to set political district lines after a U.S. Census every 10 years, the Legislature is free to undo the commission's work in the years between — drawing legislators' own self-serving lines. Good luck with that. Let the lawsuits begin! Warning: This threatened gerrymandering war — which could expand to other states — may blow up in both Democratic and Republican party faces. Voters are not as dumb as politicians think they are. They can spot election cheating when they see it. Like it or not, the balance of power in Washington should be decided by voters at the ballot box, not schemers in the backroom. If we believe in the electoral system that is the foundation of our democracy, we must trust voters. California's legislators will return to Sacramento after a summer break in a couple of weeks. Hopefully Democrats then also will return to their good senses.


NBC News
27 minutes ago
- NBC News
Senate confirms former Fox News host Jeanine Pirro as U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia
The Senate voted on Saturday to confirm former Fox News host and prosecutor Jeanine Pirro as U.S. Attorney for Washington DC. The vote was along party lines, 50-45, with Senators Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Roger Wicker, R-Miss., Peter Welch, D-Vt., and Reuben Gallego D-Ariz., not voting. Pirro had been serving as interim U.S. attorney for DC since May, after Trump appointed her to replace conservative activist Ed Martin as the top federal prosecutor in Washington. In a Truth Social post announcing Pirro's appointment, Trump lauded the former prosecutor as a 'powerful crusader for victims of crime" and "incredibly well qualified for the position." Pirro has been among the most prominent and fiercest allies of Trump, previously using her platform as a host of two Fox News programs to push conspiracy theories about voting in the aftermath of Trump's 2020 election loss. She was cited in a defamation lawsuit against Fox News by Dominion Voting Systems for he role spreading the election disinformation. Fox News ultimately reached a $787.5 million settlement with Dominion in 2023. Pirro previously served as an assistant district attorney for Westchester County, New York, ultimately becoming the first woman elected to serve as the Westchester County District Attorney. During her tenure, Pirro started the first domestic violence unit in a prosecutor's office, an accomplishment Trump cited in his decision to appoint her as a U.S. attorney. Following her judicial career, Pirro in 2005 launched an unsuccessful bid for the Republican nomination for Senate in New York, aiming to challenge then incumbent Hillary Clinton. Soon after, she launched a campaign for New York attorney general, but the effort was ultimately derailed by a federal probe over a plot by Pirro to record her then-husband Albert Pirro, who she suspected was having an affair. Pirro's confirmation continues a trend of Trump rewarding supportive Fox News hosts with high-profile appointments, with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy among the former Fox News personnel working in Trump's administration.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Why Donald Trump Says It's 'Difficult' to Pardon Sean 'Diddy' Combs
Originally appeared on E! Online isn't doing any favors. Three months after he first shared insight into the possibility of granting the rap mogul a presidential pardon if convicted of his crimes, the president admitted that a few of their past encounters have made him ultimately unlikely to issue a pardon. "Well, he was essentially, I guess, sort of half-innocent," Trump told Newsmax's Rob Finnerty on August 1, weeks after Combs was found guilty on two out of five charges in his case. "Still in jail or something. He was celebrating a victory, but I guess it wasn't as good of a victory." Adding that the two hadn't spoken in years, Trump went on to note that their relationship had always been amicable—until the 2020 presidential election. 'I was very friendly with him,' he recalled of their relationship. 'I got along with him great. Seemed like a nice guy, I didn't know him well. When I ran for office, he was very hostile.' More from E! Online Why Bryan Kohberger Left Roommate Dylan Mortensen Alive, According to Idaho Prosecutor How Sixteen Candles' Jami Gertz Became the Richest Woman in Hollywood Tom Selleck, 80, Looks Unrecognizable During Rare Outing Without Signature Mustache 'It's hard, we're human beings,' he continued. 'We don't like to have things cloud our judgment, right? But when you knew someone and you were fine and then you run for office and he made some terrible statements. So, I don't know. It's more difficult. Makes it more, I'm being honest, makes it more difficult to do." As for what Combs—who was ultimately convicted on prostitution-related offenses but acquitted of the sex trafficking and racketeering charges after 29 days in court—previously said about Trump? One month prior to the 2020 election, he expressed to Charlamagne tha God that he thought the 79-year-old did a 'great job of rattling America.' "Seeing what's going on, White men like Trump need to be banished,' the Bad Boy Records founder said on Revolt TV at the time. 'That way of thinking, it's real dangerous. This man literally threatened the lives of us and our families about going to vote. 'Stand back and stand by.'' 'We're in a war of love versus hate,' he added. 'The number one priority is to get Trump out of office." For a deeper look into Combs' legal battle, keep reading… Ex-Girlfriend Cassie Ventura's Lawyer Reacts to VerdictSean "Diddy" Combs Reacts to Split VerdictJurors Reach a Verdict in Sean "Diddy" Combs Sex Trafficking CaseProsecutors Conclude With Nearly Five-Hour Closing ArgumentsProsecutors Seek to Streamline Charges Against Sean 'Diddy' CombsSean 'Diddy' Combs Confirms He Won't Be TestifyingDefense Shares Estimation on Closing ArgumentsJuror Sees Apparent Footage From 'Freak Offs'Hotel Rooms Were Stocked With Baby Oil, Plan-B Pills For 'Freak Offs'Cassie Ventura and Sean 'Diddy' Combs's Texts About His Alleged Abuse RevealedSean 'Diddy' Combs' Former Assistant Denies Being Drug Mule But Says He Bought Thousands of Dollars in Drugs for the RapperJudge Cancels Court on Day 26 of Sean 'Diddy' Combs Trial Over Sick JurorSecond Sean 'Diddy' Combs Jury Member Faces Possible DismissalKanye West Supports Sean 'Diddy' Combs With Courthouse VisitSean 'Diddy' Combs' Ex Says Mogul Was Upset After She Attended Another Man's 'Freak Off'Prosecutors Seek Removal of Juror in Sean 'Diddy' Combs' TrialSean 'Diddy' Combs' Ex Has Heated Exchange With Defense Team During Cross-ExaminationSean 'Diddy' Combs' Ex Says She Wondered What Was 'Driving Him' SexuallySean 'Diddy' Combs' Ex Mentions Koby Bryant, Shaquille O'Neil and Michael Jordan During TestimonySean 'Diddy' Combs' Ex Says Mogul's Chief of Staff 'Influenced a Great Deal' of Their RomanceJudge Denies Sean 'Diddy' Combs' Defense Team's Second Motion for a MistrialSean 'Diddy' Combs' Ex Details Hourslong 2024 BeatingSean 'Diddy' Combs' Ex Says Attack By Rapper Left Her 'Golfball-sized' WeltsSean 'Diddy' Combs' Ex Details Homeland Security Raid at Her Home For the latest breaking news updates, click here to download the E! News App Solve the daily Crossword