Public schools in the United States don’t track the number of undocumented students enrolled due to a U.S. Supreme Court decision granting these students the constitutional right to free, public education.
Nevertheless, there have been efforts over the years by state and school district leaders to change that and to bar undocumented students’ access to public schools. Most recently, Ryan Walters, Oklahoma’s elected superintendent of public instruction, pushed forward a proposed rule requiring parents to provide proof of citizenship upon enrolling children in public schools.
But Walters’ effort hit a snag when a fellow Republican, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, denounced the move as using children as “political pawns,” adding that he would stop the rule from taking effect.
“In Oklahoma, our constitution says we’re going to educate all kids, and I want to make sure that every kid feels safe and is being educated in the state of Oklahoma,” Stitt said at a Feb. 12 press conference.
The fate of Oklahoma’s proposed rule illustrates how complicated the intersection of education and immigration can get—a reality educators across the country are currently trying to navigate as federal immigration policies shift.
Here’s more about what has happened so far regarding Oklahoma’s rule, and what could happen next:
Can undocumented immigrants attend K-12 schools in the United States?
In the 1982 Plyler v. Doe case, the U.S. Supreme Court granted undocumented students the constitutional right to a free, public education. There are estimates of the undocumented student population, but schools do not specifically request immigration status information when students enroll.
Close to half of all states and the District of Columbia also offer some form of financial assistance to undocumented college students.
Did the Oklahoma board of education approve a proposed rule requiring proof of citizenship in school enrollment?
On Jan. 28, the Oklahoma state board of education unanimously approved a proposed rule from Walters requiring parents to provide their child’s proof of citizenship or legal immigration status upon enrollment.
Walters argued the rule would not prohibit student enrollment but would assist districts in knowing how to allocate resources to serve students. Critics argue knowledge of students’ immigration status is not necessary to meet students’ needs.
The rule defines proof of citizenship or legal immigration status as a certified U.S. birth certificate; a valid, unexpired U.S. passport; a valid Oklahoma driver license, originally issued after November 1, 2007; a naturalization/citizenship certificate; and an unexpired Permanent Resident Card, and more.
Lawmakers in Indiana, New Jersey, Tennessee, and Texas have also introduced legislation that would require undocumented students to pay tuition to attend public schools or bar them from enrollment.
Is a rule now in effect requiring proof of citizenship in school enrollment in Oklahoma?
The proposed Oklahoma rule requiring proof of citizenship in school enrollment must now be reviewed by the state legislature who can approve or disapprove the rules by joint resolution. If they fail to pass such a joint resolution, the governor can approve or disapprove the rules through a declaration. The governor can veto a joint resolution approving or disapproving the rule, according to Oklahoma’s permanent rulemaking process.
Stitt, however, has expressed opposition to the rule.
A second-term governor who is term-limited in 2027, Stitt has also removed and replaced three members of the state board of education who voted for the rule, though he cited disappointing academic and assessment outcomes in the state’s schools as the rationale for a “fresh set of eyes” on the board.
What do Oklahoma state leaders think about requiring proof of citizenship in school enrollment in Oklahoma?
Stitt described the proposed rule requiring proof of citizenship in school enrollment as a political move that would not serve law enforcement.
“Collecting 6-, 7-, 8-year-old kids’ addresses and immigration status in the state of Oklahoma, that’s not a public safety issue,” Stitt said at the press conference. “Let’s go after people that are committing crimes, and let’s not terrorize and make our kids not show up at school.”
Kica Matos, president of the National Immigration Law Center, said in a statement that Stitt’s “sound rejection of a radical attempt to undermine the right to education is a result of the concerted advocacy of parents, educators, and advocates across Oklahoma who mobilized to oppose it.” The NILC originally submitted public comment opposing the proposed rule.
Walters, in an emailed response to EdWeek, said the governor is “going against the will of Oklahomans” in his comments and alluded to the governor supporting undocumented immigrants.
Walters had previously expressed support for allowing immigration agents into schools to support Trump’s mass deportation efforts. The Trump administration rescinded a policy in January that recognizes schools as protected areas where immigration enforcement generally can’t take place.
Stitt, in his press conference, insisted he was tough on the border, and on Feb. 21 announced that the state finalized three agreements with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security which grant state law enforcement agencies enhanced authority to enforce federal immigration laws.
Stitt’s office did not respond to multiple requests for comment before publication.
