An effort led by Oklahoma鈥檚 state superintendent to require parents to provide proof of citizenship when enrolling their children in school failed in the state legislature this month.
The administrative rule change, approved by the state鈥檚 board of education back in January, marked one of the earliest state-level actions taken to undermine the 1982 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the Plyler v. Doe case since President Donald Trump鈥檚 election win. The landmark decision, which established undocumented students鈥� constitutional right to a free, public education, remains binding federal law.
Education Week has tracked at least six state efforts in recent months to undermine Plyler, including Oklahoma鈥檚 administrative rule change, with two actions still in play as of May 27, in Texas and New Jersey. A bill in Tennessee that would require schools to identify undocumented students and charge them tuition is currently paused until the state legislature returns in January.
Collecting immigration status information at enrollment and charging tuition to undocumented families would defy federal law, according to legal experts.
Oklahoma lawmakers back down from Plyler challenge
In January, the Oklahoma state board of education unanimously approved the rule change championed by Ryan Walters, the elected leader of the state鈥檚 schools.
Walters, a Republican, argued the rule, which would require collecting immigration status information, would not prohibit student enrollment but would assist districts in knowing how to allocate resources to serve students. Critics say such information is not necessary and could discourage families from enrolling their children in local schools.
In February, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, also a Republican, announced he would block the rule from taking effect, calling it a political move.
But the rule never made it to Stitt鈥檚 desk. The state鈥檚 House of Representatives rejected it, even after Republican Rep. Molly Jenkins attempted to revive it by attaching it to legislation approving other state department of education rules, a move that representatives unanimously rejected.
鈥淲e are pursuing other options after this amendment was struck down by the House Committee,鈥� Walters said in a statement to Education Week, without providing additional details on those other options.
In a statement to Education Week, Stitt noted a number of actions he鈥檚 taken to crack down on illegal immigration.
鈥淚 know that at the end of the day, it鈥檚 essential that we get the criminal element out of our country,鈥� he said. 鈥淲e can do all that without targeting kids or putting them on lists, especially just in an attempt to get headlines.鈥�
Efr茅n Olivares, the legal director at the National Immigration Law Center group, said in a statement to Education Week that 鈥淭he bipartisan rebuke of an unpopular attempt to erode children鈥檚 freedom to learn in Oklahoma was the right thing to do.鈥�
鈥淭his should send a clear message to states across the country: the priority should be to have American public schools provide a quality education to every child,鈥� he added.
Attacks on Plyler remain in limbo
The Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank behind the Project 2025 policy playbook shaping much of Trump鈥檚 agenda, published a brief in 2024 recommending that states pass legislation directly defying Plyler, with the goal of sparking lawsuits that would ultimately land before the Supreme Court so it could to revisit the 1982 case.
Though legal experts and advocates continue to monitor state-level efforts to undermine Plyler, some have expressed relief over recent setbacks to those efforts, such as in Tennessee, where state leaders raised concerns that possibly violating undocumented students鈥� rights could imperil federal funding.
