The Trump administration is seeking to prohibit undocumented students from federally funded early childhood and postsecondary career and technical education as part of a multi-agency effort to bar undocumented immigrants from accessing services it says are similar to welfare.
The U.S. departments of Education and Health and Human Services were among several federal agencies to submit official notices Thursday arguing that undocumented immigrants were ineligible for a wide range of the programs they oversee.
The notices take aim at Head Start, the preschool program for children from families living in poverty, and federally funded, postsecondary CTE programs and adult education. The restrictions on undocumented students benefiting from programs that receive federal funding under the Perkins program, which funds CTE, generally wouldn鈥檛 affect services in K-12 schools but would affect dual enrollment and early college programs that allow high school students to earn college credit, the Trump administration said.
Trump administration officials said their moves are aimed at reducing incentives for illegal immigration and directing taxpayer dollars to citizens.
鈥淭he department will ensure that taxpayer funds are reserved for citizens and individuals who have entered our country through legal means who meet federal eligibility criteria,鈥� Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a prepared statement.
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said the change 鈥渞estores integrity to federal social programs, enforces the rule of law, and protects vital resources for the American people.鈥�
The notices, which go back on decades of precedent, are another way President Donald Trump鈥檚 administration has stepped up immigration enforcement.
A 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision protects undocumented students鈥� right to a free, public education. And by barring undocumented students from only early childhood and postsecondary programs funded by the federal government, the administration argues it鈥檚 respecting that legal precedent by not interfering with students鈥� access to a basic public education. But some see the move as potentially narrowing the definition of a basic education and, thus, what undocumented students have a right to receive in school.
鈥淚 don鈥檛 think that they are doing this because the cost savings are so critical to their mission,鈥� said Julie Sugarman, associate director at the Migration Policy Institute鈥檚 National Center on Immigrant Integration Policy. 鈥淭he main implication that they鈥檙e looking for鈥攁nd that is very likely what we鈥檝e seen from other kinds of actions like this鈥攊s that it does have a chilling effect. It does affect people鈥檚 thoughts about whether the United States would be a welcoming place to come.鈥�
The departments are accepting comments for 30 days. The Education Department said it won鈥檛 begin enforcement until Aug. 9. The Health and Human Services Department said the changes to the programs it runs take effect immediately.
鈥楾his is a pretty big deal鈥� for Head Start
The notices take aim at decisions made during Democratic President Bill Clinton鈥檚 administration, under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, which overhauled the nation鈥檚 welfare system. The law restricted eligibility for immigrants to receive some public benefits, though with some exceptions.
The Trump administration is arguing that a wider range of federal programs than initially designated fall under that law鈥檚 definition of 鈥渇ederal public benefits鈥� and can thus be conditioned on whether recipients have legal immigration status.
that Medicaid, child care subsidies for low-income families, Head Start, heating assistance, and more now fall under the definition of 鈥渇ederal public benefits.鈥� The agency argues that Head Start is similar to a welfare benefit and, as a result, an undocumented parent can鈥檛 apply to participate and an undocumented student can鈥檛 enroll.
鈥淭his is a pretty big deal. For 60 years, Head Start has opened its doors to any child who needs the program and who meets the federal requirements to receive services,鈥� said Katie Hamm, the former acting deputy assistant secretary for early childhood development in the Administration for Children and Families at HHS. 鈥淭o characterize this as a public benefit and a welfare program is a change, because Head Start has long been considered a school readiness program, an education program that is really focused on 鈥� preparing the child comprehensively for school.鈥�
There is some nuance, said Hamm, who served in HHS during the Biden administration. Nonprofit organizations, which operate about 70% of Head Start programs, are not required to verify immigration status.
And in the Head Start Act, there鈥檚 a provision that states that, once a child is enrolled, they鈥檙e eligible until the end of the program鈥攖ypically, until they go to kindergarten.
鈥淚 think there鈥檚 a lot of nuance and questions to be figured out here,鈥� Hamm said. 鈥淎t the same time, there鈥檚 no denying that this will have a chilling effect on families鈥� willingness to access Head Start, and that is a loss for communities across the country.鈥�
Education Department changes could affect dual enrollment, early college
Meanwhile, the that many of its programs are 鈥減ublic benefits鈥� subject to the immigration status verification requirements. They include adult education and postsecondary career and technical education programs under the Perkins program鈥攖he primary federal funding source for CTE.
The Trump administration argues those changes affect post-secondary education only and not the basic K-12 public education undocumented students have a right to receive.
The administration鈥檚 notice says that federally funded dual enrollment and early college programs鈥攚hich have been growing in high schools across the country and let high school students receive college credit鈥攁re public benefits for which undocumented students aren鈥檛 eligible because they鈥檙e postsecondary rather than basic K-12 programs.
The Education Department says undocumented students don鈥檛 have a right to postsecondary programs
McMahon about whether she thinks undocumented students should receive a free, public education, as dictated under the 1982 Plyler v. Doe case.
Conservative politicians in recent years have complained of the cost of educating undocumented students and have discussed policies that would go against 笔濒测濒别谤鈥�including a proposal in Oklahoma earlier this year that would require schools to collect students鈥� immigration status.
The conservative Heritage Foundation that go against Plyler to set up an eventual challenge that reaches the Supreme Court.
While Plyler is settled law, it leaves some questions unanswered, said Rachel Moran, professor of law and director of the education law program at Texas A&M University.
鈥淭he only thing that the court said was Texas cannot completely exclude these children from the public schools, and it didn鈥檛 say that there are ancillary areas where they have to be included,鈥� Moran said.
鈥淐ould you argue that Head Start is ancillary to access to education, so long as you can go to kindergarten or 1st grade? Is career education, vocational education, technical education one path, but you still have other paths open, so you鈥檙e still getting minimum access to the educational program? I think that鈥檚 a really difficult question.鈥�
In its reasoning, the Education Department tried to narrow 笔濒测濒别谤鈥檚 application to its programs.
鈥淭he department does not interpret the holding in Plyler as conferring any rights to adults,鈥� agency lawyers wrote in the department鈥檚 Federal Register notice. 鈥淣or does the holding in Plyler reach the question as to whether a minor has the right to postsecondary education (such as a 17-year-old individual who may wish to enroll in postsecondary programs, like dual enrollment) or adult training programs that are not included within a 鈥榖asic public education.鈥欌��
By restricting what鈥檚 considered 鈥渂asic education,鈥� it creates a 鈥渟lippery slope鈥� among education programs that receive federal funding鈥攁nd the narrow reading could eventually trickle down to K-12, said Amanda Miller, the former deputy assistant secretary for higher education programs, who served in the Education Department during the Biden administration.
鈥淲hile the focus of the interpretive rule is on Workforce, WIOA, and Perkins programs, it points out what it calls 鈥榝lawed reasoning鈥� from the earlier guidance, which determined that preschool, elementary, and secondary education programs weren鈥檛 included in the 1996 law, so we are likely to see limitations on a broader set of federal programs,鈥� Miller said.
