Oklahoma's State Board of Education has approved a controversial proposal that mandates parents enrolling children in public schools to provide proof of their child's U.S. citizenship or legal immigration status. This rule, aimed at supporting former President Donald Trump's immigration enforcement policies, received unanimous support from the board but still requires legislative and gubernatorial approval before implementation (AP News). The measure would not infringe upon the right of students without legal status to attend schools but would necessitate school districts to maintain a count of those unable to provide documentation.

State Superintendent Ryan Walters has justified the rule by stating it is vital for tracking student populations and effectively allocating resources, including English as a Second Language programs and other educational supports (CNN). Walters further endorsed the enforcement of existing immigration laws, allowing federal agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to operate in Oklahoma schools, a move that has generated fear within immigrant communities across the state.

Many advocates have vocalized their opposition to this legislative approach. For example, Arturo Alonso-Sandoval, a Democratic Representative, has conveyed concerns among parents, stating, "the community is scared, obviously... They are starting to question: Do I unenroll my child from school?" This sentiment is echoed within larger districts such as Oklahoma City Public Schools, where 57% of students are Hispanic, underlining the anxiety surrounding possible ramifications from these policies (Newsweek, LA Times).

The policy draws from a previous Supreme Court decision known as Plyler v. Doe, which affirmed in 1982 that all children, irrespective of their immigration status, have a constitutional right to public education (CBS News). Despite this, critics fear the new rule will often deter legal families from enrolling children, jeopardizing the educational system's integrity and inclusivity.

With growing protests against the rule, advocacy groups argue such measures revive fears of exclusion and legal repercussions among immigrant families, thereby undermining their children's educational opportunities and societal engagement. The ruling's potential to reshape both educational policy and immigrant rights remains a critical concern that activists are prepared to combat (The Guardian, USA Today).