How immigration enforcement is harming US schools and students — Brookings
Key Takeaways
- It has been reported that Brookings analysis links immigration enforcement activity near schools to drops in attendance and negative educational outcomes.
- Enforcement actions — including ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) operations and local partnerships like 287(g) — create fear in immigrant and mixed‑status families that affects children’s learning and well‑being.
- Schools are legally considered "sensitive locations" under DHS (Department of Homeland Security) guidance, and student records are protected by FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act), but enforcement still occurs near schools.
- The human impact includes missed school days, trauma and hesitancy to access services; schools and families should know their legal protections and consider policy changes to reduce harm.
Brookings findings and human impact
It has been reported that Brookings researchers found a measurable connection between immigration enforcement activity close to K–12 schools and declines in student attendance, test performance, and family engagement. The effect is not merely statistical. Parents arrested or fearing arrest pull children from class, stop attending school events, or withdraw children entirely. The result is interrupted learning, increased anxiety among students, and extra strain on school counselors and teachers trying to address trauma rather than instruction.
Legal and policy context
ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) is the federal agency that carries out interior immigration enforcement; some local police also participate through programs such as 287(g), which deputizes local officers to enforce federal immigration law. DHS guidance designates schools as "sensitive locations" where enforcement is generally discouraged, and FERPA limits disclosure of student education records without consent (unless a court order or specific exception applies). Nevertheless, enforcement near schools has continued in practice in some jurisdictions, and it has been reported that local agreements and inconsistent implementation of guidance are factors in those incidents.
What it means for families, schools and policymakers
For parents and students, the practical takeaway is to know basic rights: schools generally should not release student records to immigration authorities without proper legal process, and parents can consult an immigration attorney about options if they or a family member face enforcement. For school districts, the Brookings reporting suggests reviewing policies, training staff on FERPA and "sensitive location" guidance, and strengthening trauma‑informed supports for affected students. For policymakers, the findings add to calls for clearer limits on school‑proximate enforcement and for data‑driven policies that prioritize children’s education and safety over interior enforcement actions.
Source: Original Article