How Federal Policies Are Undermining Educational Opportunity for Immigrant Students – Learning Policy Institute

 

Report on U.S. Federal Policies and Their Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

Recent federal policy actions in the United States represent a significant departure from the long-standing legal precedent ensuring access to public education for all children regardless of immigration status. A shift in federal priorities, characterized by increased funding for immigration enforcement and corresponding cuts to education, health, and nutrition services, directly challenges the achievement of several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This report analyzes these policy shifts and their adverse impacts on SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

Analysis of Federal Policy Shifts and Affected Populations

Legislative and Administrative Actions

A series of legislative and administrative actions has fundamentally altered the federal approach to education and social services for immigrant communities. These actions create an environment of fear and erect significant barriers to legally guaranteed opportunities.

• Shift in Federal Investments: Federal spending has been redirected from education and social programs towards immigration enforcement. H.R. 1 allocated approximately $90 billion for the detention and deportation of immigrants, a substantial increase, while the administration’s budget request proposed a $12.4 billion (15%) cut to the U.S. Department of Education.
• Disruption of Education Funding: The administration has withheld Congressionally appropriated K-12 education funds and attempted to block the use of remaining pandemic education recovery funds.
• Restriction of Essential Services: New rules and notices aim to limit access for immigrant families to critical programs, including Head Start, Career and Technical Education (CTE), mental health services, and programs for families experiencing homelessness.

Affected Populations

These policies directly impact a large and vulnerable population of children, including both undocumented students and U.S. citizens in mixed-status families.

• There are an estimated 620,000 undocumented children in the U.S., with at least 100,000 having pending asylum applications.
• An additional 4.7 million children are U.S. citizens but have at least one noncitizen parent.

Implications for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 4: Quality Education

The recent policy changes directly contravene the core mission of SDG 4, which is to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. The right to education, affirmed in the U.S. by the Supreme Court in Plyler v. Doe, is being systematically undermined.

• Target 4.1 (Free, Equitable, and Quality Education): Increased immigration enforcement and the resulting climate of fear have led to a documented rise in student absenteeism, with some communities reporting increases of up to 22%. This directly impedes access to and completion of quality primary and secondary education.
• Target 4.2 (Early Childhood Development): Proposed restrictions on access to Head Start for children with undocumented parents threaten to deny quality early childhood development and pre-primary education to a vulnerable group.
• Target 4.5 (Eliminate Disparities in Education): The policies disproportionately affect children based on their or their parents’ immigration status, creating, rather than eliminating, disparities in educational access and opportunity.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

The federal actions exacerbate inequalities within the country, directly conflicting with the objectives of SDG 10.

• Target 10.2 (Promote Universal Inclusion): By targeting immigrant families and their children, these policies actively work against the social and economic inclusion of a specific demographic.
• Target 10.3 (Ensure Equal Opportunity): The restrictions on education, health, and nutrition services for immigrant families are a direct assault on the principle of equal opportunity, creating a class of children with diminished access to the foundational services needed for success.

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

The physical and mental well-being of children, a prerequisite for effective learning and a central tenet of SDG 3, is jeopardized by restrictions on health and nutrition programs.

• Target 3.8 (Universal Health Coverage): H.R. 1 includes new limits on Medicaid access for lawfully present immigrants, restricting access to essential health services.
• Impact on Nutrition: Restrictions on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the subsequent impact on school meal eligibility threaten children’s nutritional status, which is directly linked to academic achievement.
• Mental Well-being: The climate of fear and uncertainty contributes to increased stress, anxiety, and psychological distress among students, who fear the detention of themselves or their parents.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The move away from established legal precedents and toward punitive enforcement measures weakens the fabric of just and inclusive institutions as envisioned by SDG 16. The federal actions challenge the rule of law as it pertains to the educational rights of children, forcing local institutions to counteract their effects.

Observed Impacts and Mitigation Efforts

Consequences for Students and Communities

The compounding federal actions have produced tangible negative outcomes for students, families, and the educational system.

• A significant rise in chronic student absenteeism among Hispanic students and those in mixed-status families.
• Increased stress, anxiety, and fear among students, negatively impacting their ability to learn.
• Reported declines in school enrollment and academic achievement in affected communities.

Local and State-Level Responses

In response to these federal policies, state and local education leaders are implementing strategies to protect students and ensure their access to education, in alignment with SDG principles.

1. Creating Safe Zones: An increasing number of school leaders are designating their campuses as safe zones to reassure students and families.
2. Training and Preparation: Districts are training educators and staff on how to support students affected by immigration enforcement and maintain communication with families.
3. Strengthening Community Partnerships: Schools are enhancing collaboration with trusted community-based organizations to provide legal services, information, and other critical support to families.

SDGs Addressed in the Article

• SDG 4: Quality Education
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
• SDG 1: No Poverty

Specific SDG Targets Identified

SDG 4: Quality Education

• Target 4.1: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education.

  The article’s central theme is the challenge to the constitutional right to a “free public education” for students regardless of immigration status, as established in Plyler v. Doe. The policies discussed, which lead to increased student absenteeism and fear, directly threaten the completion of equitable and quality education for these children.

• Target 4.2: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education.

  The article explicitly mentions a notice from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services aiming to “limit access to Head Start” for children of undocumented parents, which is a direct challenge to this target.

• Target 4.3: By 2030, ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable and quality technical, vocational and tertiary education.

  The article notes that the U.S. Department of Education issued a notice “to prevent undocumented students from accessing Career and Technical Education programs,” which could also impact “dual enrollment and early college programs.” This action directly undermines equal access to technical and vocational education.

• Target 4.a: Build and upgrade education facilities that are child, disability and gender sensitive and provide safe, non-violent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all.

  The article describes an environment of “fear among children and families, causing many students to avoid schools.” In response, school leaders are working on “creating safe zones for students and families” to counteract this unsafe and non-inclusive environment, directly aligning with the goal of providing safe learning environments.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of… origin… or other status.

  The article details how recent federal actions specifically target “undocumented students and students with at least one noncitizen parent,” creating policies that exclude them from education, health, and nutrition services based on their or their parents’ immigration status. This is a direct contradiction of the goal of inclusion.

• Target 10.7: Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies.

  The article describes a policy shift towards “massive increases in detention funding” and “increased immigration enforcement,” which has generated widespread “fear among children and families.” These actions represent a move away from well-managed migration policies towards enforcement-heavy policies that disrupt the safety and mobility of people, including children who are U.S. citizens.

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

• Target 3.8: Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk protection, access to quality essential health-care services… for all.

  The article highlights that H.R.1 “restricts access to health… programs for children with undocumented parents” and includes “new limits for legal immigrants’ Medicaid coverage.” This directly curtails access to essential health services for a vulnerable population.

• Target 3.4: By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being.

  The article mentions the negative impact of federal policies on students, including “increased stress and anxiety” and “psychological wellbeing.” It also notes a notice aiming to limit access to “mental health and substance use disorder services,” which works against the promotion of mental health.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

  The article is framed around the Plyler v. Doe Supreme Court ruling, which established a legal right to education. The new federal actions are described as challenging this legal precedent, thus undermining the rule of law. The mention of legal challenges being filed against these new policies shows efforts to use the justice system to ensure access to rights.

• Target 16.b: Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development.

  The policies described in the article are inherently discriminatory, as they target individuals based on their or their parents’ immigration status. The article argues that these policies deny a right “which must be made available to all on equal terms,” highlighting a failure to enforce non-discriminatory policies.

SDG 1: No Poverty

• Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all… and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable.

  The article discusses new restrictions on access to the “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)” for certain immigrant families. SNAP is a key social protection system in the U.S. designed to alleviate poverty and food insecurity. Limiting access for vulnerable groups is a direct setback to this target.

Indicators for Measuring Progress

• Student absenteeism and enrollment rates: The article explicitly mentions a “rise in student absenteeism” and “declines in enrollment and achievement.” It quantifies this by citing that in some communities, absenteeism “increased by 22%” and some educators are “losing half of their class.” These figures can serve as direct indicators of declining access to and participation in education (relevant to SDG 4).
• Number of children losing access to social programs: The article details restrictions on access to Head Start, Medicaid, and SNAP. An indicator would be the number of children and families who become ineligible for these programs due to the new policies. This would measure progress (or regression) on SDG 1, SDG 3, and SDG 4.
• Funding allocation shifts: The article provides specific figures on budget changes, such as a “$12.4 billion” cut to education funding and a “$90 billion” allocation for immigration detention and deportation. The ratio of spending on social services versus enforcement can be a powerful indicator of policy priorities related to SDG 4, SDG 10, and SDG 16.
• Number of schools implementing support strategies: The article mentions that an “increasing number of school leaders are ramping up efforts” by “creating safe zones,” “training staff,” and “strengthening partnerships.” The proportion of schools in affected areas that adopt these measures can be an indicator of the response to create safe and inclusive learning environments (relevant to SDG 4.a).

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

SDGs	Targets	Indicators (Mentioned or Implied in the Article)
SDG 4: Quality Education	4.1: Ensure free, equitable, quality primary and secondary education. 4.2: Ensure access to quality early childhood development and pre-primary education. 4.a: Provide safe, non-violent, inclusive learning environments.	– Student absenteeism rates (e.g., “increased by 22%”). – Student enrollment rates (e.g., “declines in enrollment”). – Number of children denied access to Head Start. – Number of schools creating “safe zones” for students.
SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities	10.2: Promote social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of origin or other status. 10.7: Facilitate orderly, safe, and responsible migration and mobility.	– Number of children excluded from educational/health programs based on immigration status. – Funding for immigration enforcement and detention (“$90 billion”) vs. social support. – Reports of fear among families preventing school attendance.
SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being	3.8: Achieve universal health coverage and access to essential health-care services. 3.4: Promote mental health and well-being.	– Number of immigrant families losing Medicaid coverage. – Number of children losing eligibility for school meal programs tied to SNAP/Medicaid. – Reports of “increased stress and anxiety” among students.
SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions	16.3: Promote the rule of law and ensure equal access to justice. 16.b: Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies.	– Number of legal challenges filed against discriminatory policies. – Existence of policies that contradict legal precedents like Plyler v. Doe. – Federal budget cuts to the Department of Education (“$12.4 billion”).
SDG 1: No Poverty	1.3: Implement social protection systems for the poor and vulnerable.	– Number of immigrant families losing access to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). – Reports of older students working to “supplement lost family income.”

Source: learningpolicyinstitute.org