Oregon leaders decry, challenge new Head Start immigration restrictions
Oregon's Head Start programs are in flux after the federal government reversed a decades-long rule that allowed children 5 and younger, regardless of immigration status, to participate in the national early childhood care program that enrolls more than 12,000 Oregon children.
U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced changes to the Head Start program earlier this month as part of a broader shift in eligibility for benefits that he said had 'diverted hardworking Americans' tax dollars to incentivize illegal immigration.'
The rule undoes historical exemptions that allow immigrant families without permanent legal status access to some community-based benefits such as substance abuse programs, certain health care clinics and Title X family planning programs.
The human services department estimates these changes will affect 115,000 children and families nationwide, according to a recent analysis. Oregon-specific numbers aren't available because the state's Head Start program doesn't collect information on immigration status.
Nancy Perin, executive director of the Wilsonville-based Oregon Head Start Association, said the group is waiting to hear how the regulations will affect different Head Start programs, such as those tied to nonprofits, universities or public schools.
Perin's understanding of the National Head Start Act is that it guarantees children enrolled in the program can remain in it until they start kindergarten. One Oregon facility estimated about a third of the children who attend would be kicked out of the program should immigration status restrictions be implemented, Perin said.
'What does that mean now? What do we do about those kiddos?' she said. 'We're just kind of in a flux.'
The new federal rules also spurred a multi-state coalition of Head Start providers that includes Oregon to update an April lawsuit it filed against the Health and Human Services Department over the closure of offices and restrictions against using funds for diversity, equity and inclusion.
The group argues the most recent directive lacks clarity and guidance around implementation, with their amended complaint calling the new regulation 'yet another step in defendants' attempt to hobble the Head Start program in defiance of Congress.'
'It's going to affect generations to come, not just today's kids, not just tomorrow's 5-year-olds, but there are people right now who are considering having them who are not going to have access to these supports,' said Candice Williams, executive director of the statewide Head Start nonprofit Family Forward Oregon, which is among the lawsuit's plaintiffs. 'That's going to limit their ability to even engage in becoming parents.'
The department is challenging an interpretation of exemptions on immigration restrictions for certain benefits provided by the federal government, such as child care, some health care clinics, and preschool that dates to the 1990s. In a July 10 statement, the National Head Start Association said families haven't been required to document their immigration status to enroll in the program in its six-decade history.
Oregon's child care shortage has been an issue lawmakers have tried to address for years. A 2023 report for Oregon's Early Learning Division found that most Oregon counties are child care deserts. Of the more than 260,000 Oregon children aged 5 and younger, 63% had all their available parents out working jobs, according to the D.C-based nonprofit First Five Years Fund. A lack of care can lead to parents losing their jobs to take care of their kids, ultimately rippling into the economy by lowering the amount of time they have to work.
In the federal lawsuit, Family Forward Oregon says that a child care provider it employs has been forced to take unpaid days off of work and was instructed they would receive reduced wages 'due to funding concerns.' Another of the group's staff members informed them she would not attend a lobbying day in Washington, D.C., because of her family's mixed immigration status, Williams said.
'We're seeing our employees not be able to do their jobs,' Williams said. 'We're seeing the Oregon families who participate in our leadership development not be able to show up for fear of retribution and retaliation.'
In a Friday statement, the two chairs of Oregon's Legislative Child Care Caucus acknowledged fears those cuts and changes to Head Start eligibility have caused for families, child care providers and workers.
The Oregon Legislature concluded this year's legislative session with a budget that slashed $45 million in early childhood learning programs, a factor that the lawmakers said was 'causing stress in communities across Oregon.' Reps. Hòa Nguyễn, D-Portland, and Jules Walters, D-West Linn, the caucus chairs, said they would continue working to protect access to child care and investing state money in the system.
'Oregon's future depends on the well-being of our youngest learners, and the people who nurture and teach them,' they said. 'We are dedicated to advancing policies that reflect those values.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags

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


Business Upturn
6 minutes ago
- Business Upturn
All three Pahalgam attackers killed in Operation Mahadev, Amit Shah confirms in Lok Sabha
By Aditya Bhagchandani Published on July 29, 2025, 12:41 IST In a significant announcement during the Lok Sabha session on Tuesday, Home Minister Amit Shah confirmed that all three Pakistani terrorists responsible for the April Pahalgam terror attack were neutralised in Operation Mahadev on July 28. The trio had been identified as members of the proscribed Pakistan-based terror group Lashkar-e-Taiba. BIG: Home Minister Amit Shah informs the Parliament about killing of Pakistan terrorists Suleiman, Jibran and Faisal in a joint operation by Indian Army, CRPF and J&K Police in Kashmir. Terrorists were responsible for the cowardly Pahalgam terror attack. Major success for forces. — Aditya Raj Kaul (@AdityaRajKaul) July 29, 2025 Shah named Suleiman, the key mastermind behind the deadly attack that claimed 26 lives, and identified the two others as Afghan and Jibran. He stated that the information was corroborated by individuals already in custody who had reportedly provided shelter to the terrorists. 'They confirmed their identities upon being shown the bodies,' Shah told the House. Reports of the elimination of Suleiman and the two others began surfacing on Monday after Operation Mahadev was launched in Dachi, near Srinagar. However, the confirmation of their direct involvement in the Pahalgam incident came only with Shah's address in Parliament. The high-profile operation, carried out jointly by the Indian Army, J&K Police, and CRPF, is being seen as a major blow to cross-border terror networks. Shah's statement has reaffirmed India's commitment to dismantling terror infrastructure and ensuring accountability for attacks on civilians. Ahmedabad Plane Crash Aditya Bhagchandani serves as the Senior Editor and Writer at Business Upturn, where he leads coverage across the Business, Finance, Corporate, and Stock Market segments. With a keen eye for detail and a commitment to journalistic integrity, he not only contributes insightful articles but also oversees editorial direction for the reporting team.

an hour ago
Court restricts who can bring voting rights challenges in a case involving voters with disabilities
WASHINGTON -- A federal appeals court panel on Monday ruled that private individuals and organizations cannot bring voting rights cases under a section of the law that allows others to assist voters who are blind, have disabilities or are unable to read. It's the latest ruling from the St. Louis-based 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, saying only the government can bring lawsuits alleging violations of the Voting Rights Act. The findings upend decades of precedent and will likely be headed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The case centered on whether an Arkansas law that limits how many voters can be assisted by one person conflicts with Section 208 of the landmark federal law. The opinion from the three-judge panel followed the reasoning of another 8th Circuit panel in a previous case from 2023. That opinion held that the Arkansas State Conference NAACP and the Arkansas Public Policy Conference could not bring cases under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. 'Like the provision at issue in Arkansas State Conference, we conclude the text and structure of (Section) 208 do not create a private right of action,' said the decision written by Judge L. Steven Grasz, a nominee of President Donald Trump. 'Likewise, we conclude no private right of action is created by the Supremacy Clause.' In the previous case, the district court judge said he could not reach an opinion on the merits because the plaintiffs did not have standing under Section 2 and gave the Justice Department five days to join the case. The circuit court panel agreed with his reasoning in a 2-1 decision. The 8th Circuit, which covers Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota, has issued three rulings holding that individuals and private entities don't have standing to bring challenges against voting laws. The other came in May in a lawsuit over North Dakota redistricting. In that case, the Spirit Lake Tribe and Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, with reservations 60 miles apart, argued that the state's 2021 legislative map violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting their voting strength and ability to elect their own candidates. The appeals court ruled in a 2-1 decision that only the U.S. Department of Justice could bring such lawsuits, and the full circuit declined to take up the case. The U.S. Supreme Court blocked the ruling last week while it decides whether to hear the case. The Justice Department declined to comment on whether it would be intervening in the Arkansas case. It earlier declined to comment on the case involving the two North Dakota tribes. Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin applauded the decision by the 8th Circuit panel, saying the 2009 state law revolving around voters with disabilities 'protects the right to vote free from undue influence or manipulation.' In the statement, he said Monday's ruling 'means that officials can continue to enforce Arkansas's laws and voters can have confidence in our elections.' The Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, which is representing the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, declined to comment. Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the Voting Rights Project for the ACLU, said she wasn't surprised by the ruling given the decisions in the earlier cases. 'I think it's important to keep focus on the fact that the 8th Circuit's decisions are radical and completely at odds with decades of precedent, including from the Supreme Court itself, as well as the text, history and purpose of the Voting Rights Act,' said Lakin, who was one of the attorneys in the initial Arkansas State Conference case. 'Private litigants have been the engine of enforcement of the Voting Rights Act for sixty years.' Section 2 is considered one of the more consequential parts of the Voting Rights Act that remains intact, after a 2013 Supreme Court decision removed Section 5. That section required that all or parts of 15 states with a history of discrimination in voting get approval from the federal government before changing their voting and election laws.


Politico
3 hours ago
- Politico
North Korea says Kim-Trump ties are ‘not bad' — but it's not giving up its nukes
In a statement carried by state media, Kim Yo Jong said she doesn't deny the personal relationship between her brother and Trump 'is not bad.' But she said if their personal relations are to serve the purpose of North Korea's denuclearization, North Korea would view it as 'nothing but a mockery.' She said North Korea's nuclear capability has sharply increased since the first round of the Kim-Trump diplomacy and that any attempt to deny North Korea as a nuclear weapons state would be rejected. 'If the U.S. fails to accept the changed reality and persists in the failed past, the DPRK- U.S. meeting will remain as a 'hope' of the U.S. side,' Kim Yo Jong said, referring to her country by its official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. She said it would be 'advisable to seek another way of contact.' Kim Yo Jong is a key official on the Central Committee of the North's ruling Workers' Party. She handles the country's relations with South Korea and the United States, and South Korean officials and experts believe she is the North's second-most powerful person after her brother. Kim Yo Jong said she was responding to reported comments by a U.S. official that Trump is open to talks on denuclearization. She likely was referring to a Saturday article by Yonhap news agency that cited an unidentified White House official as saying Trump 'remains open to engaging with Leader Kim to achieve a fully denuclearized North Korea.' 'North Korea wants to say it's not interested in talks on denuclearization and the U.S. must determine what benefits it can give to the North first,' said Nam Sung-wook, a former head of the Institute for National Security Strategy, a think tank run by South Korea's spy agency. Nam said Trump's likely desire to win a Nobel Peace Prize would prompt him to seek talks with Kim Jong Un and give him corresponding benefits for taking phased denuclearization steps. Nam said North Korea would want broad sanctions relief, a suspension of U.S.-South Korea military drills that it regards as invasion rehearsals and other economic incentives. Kim Yeol Soo, an analyst at South Korea's Korea Institute for Military Affairs, said U.S. and North Korean officials could meet if they narrow some differences on terms for restoring talks. But he said Trump's unpredictability would make it extremely difficult to predict what concessions the Americans would offer. Other experts have earlier said that North Korea — now preoccupied with its expanding cooperation with Russia — sees no urgent need to resume diplomacy with the U.S. and South Korea. On Monday, Kim Yo Jong rebuffed overtures by South Korea's new liberal government, saying its 'blind trust' in the country's alliance with the U.S. and hostility toward North Korea make it no different from its conservative predecessor.