Latest news with #CenterforLawandSocialPolicy
Yahoo
29-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Many US families depend on immigrant nannies. Trump's policies could upend that
Catalina, a 23-year-old US citizen, confidently drives to her job as a nanny and earns a fair wage. Yet her mother – an undocumented immigrant from Peru – has worked in the shadows for 30 years. 'Even though we have the same job, do the same thing, and work the same hours, the pay is very different,' Catalina tells CNN. 'I've done very well because I was born here, and the pay is very good when you speak Spanish.' CNN has changed her name to protect her identity and her mother's safety. During Barack Obama's time in the White House, Catalina's mother considered returning to Peru, according to her daughter. The Obama administration focused on curbing interior deportations (as opposed to deportations at the border) and, especially in its later years, on so-called 'quick returns' of recent border arrivals who were perceived to have fewer ties in the US. 'A lot of people told her nothing would happen, and indeed, nothing did,' Catalina says, explaining her mother ultimately decided to stay. However, the harsh immigration policies of Donald Trump's administration paint a bleaker picture for both. The 23-year-old fears her mother could be detained when she drops off the children of a family she cares for every afternoon to support her own family. 'She's a single mom. I'm the oldest daughter, so if something happens to her, I'd have to take care of my siblings,' Catalina says. 'She had to sign a paper leaving everything to me, just in case: what to do with my siblings, her things, her money. It's awful to think about, but she feels prepared.' Catalina's mother has raised her children alone and dedicated part of her life to childcare, a sector facing a deep staffing crisis—one that has worsened in recent months, as experts say immigrants are essential to sustaining it. 'The childcare sector broadly has long been facing a crisis and a shortage of workers. And immigrant workers are critical to keeping that system running. Both the formal sector and the informal sector,' Wendy Cervantes, director of Immigration and Immigrant Families at the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), tells CNN. According to a report from the National Women's Law Center, 20% of early educators in the US – an umbrella term encompassing preschool teachers, home-based childcare providers, teachers aids and program directors – are immigrants. Women make up 'a significant percentage' of the workforce in this sector nationwide. 'Care work is the work that makes all other work possible and enables all families to thrive,' the report says. However, caregivers face low wages, lack of benefits, vulnerability to exploitation, and job insecurity. Undocumented workers, for their part, also lack basic labor rights and protections. Although she has lived in the US for years, Catalina's mother does not have access to work benefits like health insurance or social security. 'She gets paid in cash or by check, but no benefits. Nothing,' Catalina says of her mother's working conditions. Every year, undocumented immigrants living in the US pay billions of dollars in taxes even though they know they won't be able to enjoy the benefits unless their status is regularized. Additionally, the constant threat of being reported limits her even when accepting jobs. 'If a job comes from an American family, I don't think she'd take it. She's afraid that if something happens, someone will call the authorities.' According to Cervantes, immigrant childcare workers 'are often an invisible workforce.' Despite their crucial role in the early education of an increasingly diverse child population, they are not sufficiently recognized. 'One thing that often goes unrecognized is that these workers are among the few who are bilingual and culturally competent, particularly in the formal sector, which is highly sought after. Many families want their children in bilingual education programs, and these workers are essential for serving an increasingly diverse child population,' adds the CLASP director. Beyond the numbers, the tightening of immigration policies under Trump's administration has directly impacted the reality of thousands of families like Catalina's. A few weeks after Trump took office, his administration announced that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents could now make arrests near places like schools, churches, and hospitals, ending a longstanding policy that prevented them from operating in so-called 'sensitive locations.' 'And now, in some states where there is greater cooperation with local police, a nanny simply driving to work could be arrested, deported, and separated from her family,' Cervantes notes. Catalina's mother experiences that anxiety firsthand every day when she gets in the car to pick up the children she cares for in the afternoons. 'When she arrives, there are always police officers managing traffic. Sometimes she hides in the car, doesn't get out. She waits for the kids to get in the car. It's awful,' Catalina says. 'If I meet her at the school, she feels a little better. But if she's alone, she doesn't.' Without protective policies in place, like the 'sensitive locations' policy, it is much harder for nannies to serve families and feel safe continuing their work, Cervantes warns. 'The way immigration enforcement measures are being applied across the country is happening with very little oversight and accountability. More people are becoming vulnerable to deportation because there is no longer prosecutorial discretion, for example, for parents or people with humanitarian reasons not to be deported. There's no way to prioritize who should or shouldn't be deported. Everyone is a priority. Therefore, everyone without status is in danger,' adds the CLASP director. Catalina is currently studying, hoping to build her mother a house in Peru in case she decides to return one day. 'Here my mom has no one, no family, no sisters, no mother. Nothing. She's alone,' she says, but insists she doesn't want to leave her alone either. 'She worries more because she says, 'My daughter will be left alone.'' Meanwhile, the Trump administration's growing push to advance its mass deportation plan could further harm the US childcare system. 'If we lose immigrant workers, especially those who care for our children, as a country we will suffer. If deportations continue at the current pace, if this budget proposal passes Congress—which would allow the administration to further increase its enforcement measures—and if we keep seeing more people lose their immigration status, then this will have a very negative impact on the workforce overall, making it harder for all working mothers and fathers to find childcare and go to work,' Cervantes says. This is the invisible role of Catalina's mother: she is the one who allows others to work while their children are cared for. Without her and many like her, the United States would be a very different country.
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Millions of immigrant families would be shut out under new child tax credit proposal
Republicans would raise the child tax credit to $2,500 per eligible child in the tax-writing committee's latest proposal. But the bill would also exclude millions of families from accessing the credit, including the country's poorest households and immigrant or mixed-status families. One provision of the bill requires a child's parent or parents to have a Social Security Number, shutting out undocumented immigrants or those without work authorization, even when the child themselves has a Social Security Number. In mixed-status households, where one parent has a Social Security Number and the other doesn't, the child is still ineligible. Some estimates show this change could impact 4.5 million children alone. Coupled with proposals from other committees that restrict access to Medicaid or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), immigrant and mixed-status families face drastically rising costs, according to Ashley Burnside, a senior policy analyst at the Center for Law and Social Policy. 'We'll see more people having to make impossible decisions,' Burnside said. 'As more families are arbitrarily restricted from accessing these critical health benefits, it's going to result in a lot of hardship for people. That is going to make all of us worse off as communities.' Many filers without Social Security Numbers use Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) to pay taxes, but would no longer be able to access tax credits under this proposal — part of an administration crackdown on immigrants using public social services. 'Immigrant families, undocumented families, use ITINs to pay around $100 billion every year in taxes. The fact that they're not able to benefit from any of these benefits intended for families undermines the idea that this is a pro-family, pro-worker provision,' said Kat Menefee, senior counsel for income security and child care at the National Women's Law Center Action Fund. Through this proposal's extension of changes from the last major tax overhaul in 2017, another 17 million of the country's lowest-income households will still not have access to the full credit because they do not earn enough to pay federal income taxes — nor will an additional 1 million children who do not have Social Security Numbers. Before 2017, all children were eligible as long as their parents filed their tax returns and met the other credit requirements. 'This bill doubles down on that assault on those seeking the American Dream by stealing tax benefits and services to working people who are paying taxes,' Rep. Linda Sánchez, a California Democrat, said during a committee markup of the 2025 tax bill. This version also eliminates the Direct File program, which allows households to file taxes with the IRS for free, and adds restrictions to applying for and receiving the Earned Income Tax Credit, potentially resulting in more families losing money meant to supplement lower-earning households. The current House tax proposal will likely change significantly, with several other sections having garnered opposition from fellow Republicans in both chambers. But the principle of removing many immigrant and mixed-status households is likely to stay, as Republicans look to find any money to cut in alignment with President Donald Trump's desire to slash federal spending. More than 46 million taxpayers claim the child tax credit each year. During the pandemic, congressional Democrats and then-President Joe Biden temporarily increased the child tax credit to up to $3,600, expanded eligibility to more of the lowest-earning families and delivered the credit in monthly checks to recipients rather than in one lump sum. These changes lifted millions of households out of poverty. But the credit reverted back to $2,000 in 2022 — and child poverty rose soon after. Last year, GOP senators and former Sen. Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Independent who used to caucus with Democrats, rejected a tax package that would have moderately increased the credit, part of legislation that had already passed the House with bipartisan support. The fact that Republicans had signed onto a House bill that expanded access to more lower-earning families — with direct involvement from Rep. Jason Smith, the Missouri Republican who chairs the Ways and Means Committee — shows that those same improvements are financially possible to add again, according to Bob Greenstein, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution. But last August's bill was proposed under former President Biden, and Republicans signed on to some Democratic policies. Now that the GOP controls the House, Senate and White House, Republicans 'threw that over the side,' Greenstein added. Combined with proposed deep cuts to Medicaid and SNAP, families with modest or low incomes will be adversely affected, he said. 'It's curious — the reconciliation bill as a whole really slams the working family, working paycheck-to-paycheck,' Greenstein said. 'Those families (were also) the key part of the Trump base in 2024.' Senators have a wider array of ideas to increase or improve the child tax credit, including a proposal to offset a parent's payroll taxes from Sen. Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican, though he has not yet filed official legislation, nor does he sit on the Finance Committee. Sen. Mike Crapo, the Idaho Republican who chairs the committee, has signaled interest in increasing the credit in some capacity, but he has historically been opposed to lowering the floor for qualifying family incomes, Greenstein noted. Meanwhile, Democrats, led by Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet, have laid out an ambitious plan for an expanded, tiered credit system. But the bill is all but likely to gather dust in a harsh cost-trimming environment. Lawmakers must decide on some change during the reconciliation process — otherwise, the credit reverts back to a $1,000 baseline in the fall. The post Millions of immigrant families would be shut out under new child tax credit proposal appeared first on The 19th. News that represents you, in your inbox every weekday. Subscribe to our free, daily newsletter.
USA Today
13-03-2025
- Business
- USA Today
These states get up to half of their revenue from the federal government
These states get up to half of their revenue from the federal government Show Caption Hide Caption Trump revokes spending freeze in face of legal challenges STORY: The Trump administration on Wednesday appeared to abandon its proposed freeze on hundreds of billions of dollars in domestic aid, amid legal setbacks and widespread opposition. The White House budget office told federal agencies it was rescinding a memo that had ordered them to pause a wide swath of grant and loan payments. But officials said they still planned to block funding for Four southern states rank in the top five nationally for their dependence on federal dollars, according to a new report. And a very northern state, Alaska, is the most 'federally dependent' in the union, according to WalletHub. Southern states rank second through fifth: Kentucky, West Virginia, Mississippi and South Carolina. WalletHub compiled the ranking 'just to point out that not all states are equal when it comes to federal funding,' said Chip Lupo, a writer and analyst at the personal finance site. The report has currency in light of the Trump administration's recent efforts to freeze federal funding to programs that do not align with the Republican agenda. The freeze was announced in a January memo, subsequently rescinded. It is now the subject of an ongoing court battle. Meanwhile, Congressional budget resolutions call for massive cuts in federal funding, potentially forcing states to make 'incredibly hard decisions' about Medicaid and other programs, according to a report from the left-leaning Center for Law and Social Policy. Those predictions echo warnings from Democrats in Congress. Republicans contend that Medicaid and other state-level programs are safe. Federal dollars fund up to half of state budgets Federal dollars make up 18% to 50% of state budgets, depending on the state, according to data from the National Association of State Budget Officers. On average, about one-third of state dollars come from the federal government. Millions of Americans in every state rely on federal funds, including 72 million Medicaid recipients, 30 million students eating subsidized meals, and 43 million food stamp recipients, according to a report from the left-leaning Center for American Progress. States receive federal aid for many other purposes, from disaster relief to covering the costs of improvements in education, transportation and other infrastructure needs. To measure each state's reliance on the federal government, WalletHub looked at three factors: How much of each state's revenue comes from the federal government; what share of the state's workforce is employed in federal jobs; and how much federal money the state receives for every dollar paid in federal taxes. Many of the most federally dependent states, as it turns out, are relatively rural, sparsely populated and 'need federal funding for infrastructure,' Lupo said. Some, like Alaska, have large tracts of federally owned land. Others, like South Carolina, have relatively large military populations. Others have powerful, long-tenured representatives in Congress who have steered federal dollars to their constituents. 'Kentucky, for example: Mitch McConnell, he's an institution in Congress,' Lupo said of the long-serving Republican senator. What the Trump administration means for your wallet: Sign up for USA TODAY's Daily Money newsletter. The five most federally dependent states Here are the five most federally dependent states, in order: Alaska More than half of Alaska's revenue comes from the federal government. One reason is the challenge of maintaining infrastructure in an enormous state with difficult weather and a small population. Other factors include the state's vulnerability to natural disasters, and its military value. Nearly 5% of Alaska's workforce is employed by the federal government. In most other states, the share ranges from 1% to 3%. Kentucky Kentucky receives $3.35 in federal funds for every dollar Kentuckians pay in federal taxes. Federal funding makes up roughly 46% of Kentucky's revenue, one of the highest shares in the nation. West Virginia This state receives $2.72 in federal funds for every dollar residents pay in federal taxes. Federal funding makes up roughly 45% of West Virginia's revenue. About 3.7% of the state's workforce is employed by the federal government, one of the highest rates in the nation. Mississippi Federal funding makes up 45% of state revenue in Mississippi. The state reaps $2.34 in federal funds for every dollar paid in federal taxes. South Carolina South Carolina ranks first among states for the ratio of federal dollars it receives -- $3.42 -- per federal tax dollar collected. In political terms, WalletHub found that red states are more federally dependent than blue states. The average Republican-leaning state ranks 21 among the 50 states, while the average Democrat-leaning state ranks 32. Red States rely more on federal funds New Jersey, a blue state, ranks as the least federally dependent state, WalletHub reports. Only 1.2% of state residents work in federal jobs, and federal dollars make up only 30% of state revenue. California ranks second among states least dependent on federal funding. Federal funding makes up only 28% of state revenue, and only 1.4% of residents work for the federal government. This story was updated to fix a typo.
Yahoo
11-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
How hardline anti-immigrant policies are threatening the right to education
As Donald Trump mounts escalating attacks on immigrants in the US in the first weeks of his second term, schools are increasingly in the crosshairs. He has already revoked protective status for schools and churches, so that immigration authorities can make arrests on school grounds, sending teachers scrambling to figure out ways to protect their students. Now, hardline anti-immigrant stances are being used to attack public education itself. In January, Oklahoma's board of education voted to require citizenship information from parents enrolling children in school. The move threatens a longstanding constitutional right to public education for all children, regardless of their immigration status, established in 1982 by the US supreme court. Legal and policy experts say that while the rule is likely to be struck down in the courts as unconstitutional, the threat alone will cause damage and cause terrified parents to keep their children out of schools, which undermines a fundamental democratic institution: the right to education. 'The purpose of our schools is to educate children, and to educate all our children,' said Wendy Cervantes, director of immigration and immigrant families at the Center for Law and Social Policy (Clasp). 'Immigration enforcement of any kind should stay out of our schools, period.' *** Requiring proof of citizenship for public school enrollment would severely disadvantage American immigrant families, including those with legal status, experts say. The impact would be vast: approximately one in four children (nearly 18 million in total) have at least one foreign-born parent. Most immediately, the rule will scare immigrant parents – especially those without documentation or whose cases may be pending – to the point that they keep their kids out of school entirely. This phenomenon, in which immigrant families turn inward and avoid critical resources when they perceive restrictions are tightening, is known in immigration policy circles as the 'chilling effect', and it is widely documented. 'This is exactly the kind of thing that causes parents, very rationally, to hold their kids back and not send them to school,' said Jon Valant, director of the Brown Center on Education Policy at the Brookings Institution, emphasizing that the chilling effect will descend whether the rule is adopted or not. 'There is harm done just in talking about this,' he said. Efrén C Olivares, director of strategic litigation and advocacy at the Southern Poverty Law Center, said that the fear component was deliberate, and would disproportionately affect those whose status is in question. 'By being put in the position of having to respond to this question, somebody who may not have regular status is going to really be threatened and be in a vulnerable position,' he said. For those children who are kept home out of fear, the effect is detrimental, experts say. Those children may opt to join the workforce. And if a child is not old enough for legal employment, or is not eligible for a work permit, they are more likely to be exploited or to work in an unsafe job, explained Melissa Adamson, an attorney at the National Center for Youth Law. The result is that their entire lives get sidetracked, and their potential – which schools are designed to nurture – quashed. 'It cuts off their entire ability to succeed,' Adamson said. Restricting access to education would also deepen social divisions and negatively affect the entire American economy by exacerbating marginalization and impoverishment, explained Kristina Lovato, director of the Center on Immigration and Child Welfare at the University of California at Berkeley. 'Educational access empowers our children with the tools to lead productive lives and contribute to the economy and overall wellbeing of our communities, and every child in the US deserves this chance to reach their full potential,' she said. According to Cervantes, it is for these reasons that states have such stringent truancy laws in place. 'A basic K-12 education is essential to preventing the creation of a permanent underclass,' she said. 'It is in the best interest of not only children, but all of society, for children to be productive and learning.' *** The Oklahoma effort is spearheaded by Ryan Walters, the Republican state superintendent who has railed against the presence of 'woke ideology' in schools, believes that the Bible should be required learning and has claimed that the 1921 Tulsa massacre – in which 300 Black people were murdered by their white neighbors – was not motivated by race. While the proposal is singular in its content, the rule sits squarely within the far-right playbook. Mixed messaging surrounding the measure's aims contribute to confusion, which experts cite as a core strategy of Trump's approach to immigration. The text of the Oklahoma rule claims parents' citizenship information will be used to inform how resources can be better allocated to serve students' tutoring, language and transportation needs. But Walters has publicly stated that Oklahoma schools would give federal agencies the information so that 'families can be deported together'. 'I don't see how knowing that a student's parent holds a passport from a different country helps the state understand that student's needs in the classroom,' said Adamson, decrying the rationale as nonsensical. 'We live in a very diverse world. A parent's nationality doesn't necessarily tell you anything about their child's educational needs.' The measure also politicizes schools, which are already at the frontline of culture wars. 'I'm also not surprised that we are seeing some more culture-war battles penetrating schools as they relate to immigration,' said Valant. Perhaps most critically, the proposal represents a tolerance for the undermining of long-held democratic institutions and values – namely, the free and equal right to public education. For Olivares, the crux of the matter lies in the fact that the measure would also deny that right to millions of US-citizen children whose parents are foreign-born. That, he says, reveals the rule's racist underpinnings. 'They're going to be the children of US immigrants whose skin is a certain shade of dark,' he said. 'They were born in this country. What does that say? What values does that reflect about a society?' What's more, it puts the right to education itself on a slippery slope. Valant said there was no reason to think that students with disabilities or transgender kids wouldn't become future targets. 'Who do we pull out of the community next?' he asked. *** From a legal standpoint, the feasibility of asking parents for citizenship information remains murky, most notably because the 1982 Plyler v Doe case enshrining the right to education for all children regardless of citizenship creates a substantial constitutional hurdle. For that reason, most legal and policy experts anticipate the Oklahoma measure to be struck down if passed into state law. Related: Kids leave childcare as immigration fears hit the US's youngest 'It was unwise public policy then to adopt policies that may harm children's access to schooling, and that has not changed,' said Debu Gandhi, senior director of immigration policy at the Center for American Progress. They also caution against putting too much faith in the constitution, especially given the track record of this supreme court. Although Plyler has been settled law for nearly 43 years, the court has overturned other cases with even longer legacies, such as Roe v Wade, the 1973 landmark case protecting the constitutional right to abortion, Olivares explained. Regardless of whether this particular measure takes effect, the situation unfolding in Oklahoma is probably a preview of similar efforts that will be undertaken in school districts around the nation, warned Valant. 'This is a particularly aggressive move when it comes to immigration enforcement in schools, but I don't think it'll be the last,' he said.
The Guardian
10-02-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
How hardline anti-immigrant policies are threatening the right to education
As Donald Trump mounts escalating attacks on immigrants in the US in the first weeks of his second term, schools are increasingly in the crosshairs. He has already revoked protective status for schools and churches, so that immigration authorities can make arrests on school grounds, sending teachers scrambling to figure out ways to protect their students. Now, hardline anti-immigrant stances are being used to attack public education itself. In January, Oklahoma's board of education voted to require citizenship information from parents enrolling children in school. The move threatens a longstanding constitutional right to public education for all children, regardless of their immigration status, established in 1982 by the US supreme court. Legal and policy experts say that while the rule is likely to be struck down in the courts as unconstitutional, the threat alone will cause damage and cause terrified parents to keep their children out of schools, which undermines a fundamental democratic institution: the right to education. 'The purpose of our schools is to educate children, and to educate all our children,' said Wendy Cervantes, director of immigration and immigrant families at the Center for Law and Social Policy (Clasp). 'Immigration enforcement of any kind should stay out of our schools, period.' Requiring proof of citizenship for public school enrollment would severely disadvantage American immigrant families, including those with legal status, experts say. The impact would be vast: approximately one in four children (nearly 18 million in total) have at least one foreign-born parent. Most immediately, the rule will scare immigrant parents – especially those without documentation or whose cases may be pending – to the point that they keep their kids out of school entirely. This phenomenon, in which immigrant families turn inward and avoid critical resources when they perceive restrictions are tightening, is known in immigration policy circles as the 'chilling effect', and it is widely documented. 'This is exactly the kind of thing that causes parents, very rationally, to hold their kids back and not send them to school,' said Jon Valant, director of the Brown Center on Education Policy at the Brookings Institution, emphasizing that the chilling effect will descend whether the rule is adopted or not. 'There is harm done just in talking about this,' he said. Efrén C Olivares, director of strategic litigation and advocacy at the Southern Poverty Law Center, said that the fear component is deliberate, and will disproportionately affect those whose status is in question. 'By being put in the position of having to respond to this question, somebody who may not have regular status is going to really be threatened and be in a vulnerable position,' he said. For those children who are kept home out of fear, the effect is detrimental, experts say. Those children may opt to join the workforce. And if a child is not old enough for legal employment, or is not eligible for a work permit, they are more likely to be exploited or to work in an unsafe job, explained Melissa Adamson, an attorney at the National Center for Youth Law. The result is that their entire lives get sidetracked, and their potential – which schools are designed to nurture – quashed. 'It cuts off their entire ability to succeed,' Adamson said. Restricting access to education would also deepen social divisions and negatively affect the entire American economy by exacerbating marginalization and impoverishment, explained Kristina Lovato, director of the Center on Immigration and Child Welfare at the University of California at Berkeley. 'Educational access empowers our children with the tools to lead productive lives and contribute to the economy and overall wellbeing of our communities, and every child in the US deserves this chance to reach their full potential,' she said. According to Cervantes, it is for these reasons that states have such stringent truancy laws in place. 'A basic K-12 education is essential to preventing the creation of a permanent underclass,' she said. 'It is in the best interest of not only children, but all of society, for children to be productive and learning.' The Oklahoma effort is spearheaded by Ryan Walters, the Republican state superintendent who has railed against the presence of 'woke ideology' in schools, believes that the Bible should be required learning and has claimed that the 1921 Tulsa massacre – in which 300 Black people were murdered by their white neighbors – was not motivated by race. While the proposal is singular in its content, the rule sits squarely within the far-right playbook. Mixed messaging surrounding the measure's aims contribute to confusion, which experts cite as a core strategy of Trump's approach to immigration. The text of the Oklahoma rule claims parents' citizenship information will be used to inform how resources can be better allocated to serve students' tutoring, language and transportation needs. But Walters has publicly stated that Oklahoma schools would give federal agencies the information so that 'families can be deported together'. 'I don't see how knowing that a student's parent holds a passport from a different country helps the state understand that student's needs in the classroom,' said Adamson, decrying the rationale as nonsensical. 'We live in a very diverse world. A parent's nationality doesn't necessarily tell you anything about their child's educational needs.' The measure also politicizes schools, which are already at the frontline of culture wars. 'I'm also not surprised that we are seeing some more culture-war battles penetrating schools as they relate to immigration,' said Valant. Perhaps most critically, the proposal represents a tolerance for the undermining of long-held democratic institutions and values – namely, the free and equal right to public education. For Olivares, the crux of the matter lies in the fact that the measure would also deny that right to millions of US-citizen children whose parents are foreign-born. That, he says, reveals the rule's racist underpinnings. 'They're going to be the children of US immigrants whose skin is a certain shade of dark,' he said. 'They were born in this country. What does that say? What values does that reflect about a society?' What's more, it puts the right to education itself on a slippery slope. Valant said there is no reason to think that students with disabilities or transgender kids wouldn't become future targets. 'Who do we pull out of the community next?' he asked. From a legal standpoint, the feasibility of asking parents for citizenship information remains murky, most notably because the 1982 Plyler v Doe case enshrining the right to education for all children regardless of citizenship creates a substantial constitutional hurdle. For that reason, most legal and policy experts anticipate the Oklahoma measure to be struck down if passed into state law. 'It was unwise public policy then to adopt policies that may harm children's access to schooling, and that has not changed,' said Debu Gandhi, senior director of immigration policy at the Center for American Progress. They also caution against putting too much faith in the constitution, especially given the track record of this supreme court. Although Plyler has been settled law for nearly 43 years, the court has overturned other cases with even longer legacies, such as Roe v Wade, the 1973 landmark case protecting the constitutional right to abortion, Olivares explained. Regardless of whether this particular measure takes effect, the situation unfolding in Oklahoma is likely a preview of similar efforts that will be undertaken in school districts around the nation, warned Valant. 'This is a particularly aggressive move when it comes to immigration enforcement in schools, but I don't think it'll be the last,' he said.
