The American Council of Immigration does not approve or oppose candidates for elected offices. We aim to provide an analysis of the impact of elections on the US immigration system.
For almost 15 years, US immigrants were able to seek medical care, attend school and access other important services without much worry about encountering immigration enforcement at these locations. All this changed on the first day of the new Trump administration, when the Secretary of Homeland Security rescinded a policy restricting federal immigration enforcement in so-called protected areas.
The long-standing policy, originally published in 2011, was expanded under the Biden administration and included sites for schools, healthcare facilities, places of worship, disaster relief areas and other essential services. Immigration agents were instructed to limit enforcement in these protected areas to the greatest extent possible, with limited exceptions.
The Trump administration’s new policy removes restrictions on where immigration enforcement actions are made and instead encourages federal immigration officials to use “sound doses of common sense” to implement enforcement actions where necessary, including courts.
By ending protected area policies, immigrants and their families face increased fear and risk in places where they are most vulnerable. These changes are known to have a calm effect, leading people to avoid access to healthcare, attending schools, and participating in worship.
A few weeks after the withdrawal, some schools have already experienced a decline in attendance to students, and healthcare providers serving immigrants have recorded more appointments.
Federal government response policies to the end of protected areas
After the withdrawal, several groups filed lawsuits seeking to fully or partially restore protected area policies. In early February, a federal judge blocked immigration enforcement action at certain places of worship. Another coalition of 27 religious groups has filed a similar lawsuit, awaiting the first sentence. Another federal judge responding to a lawsuit from a Denver public school, refused to limit immigration enforcement activities in the school setting.
While these cases were unfolding, several members of Congress reintroduced the bill, HR 1061 (Protection of Sensitive Places Act) reintroduced it to codify the revoked policy. Specifically, the bill would limit the implementation of immigration enforcement measures within 1,000 feet of most locations in the original policy, and would limit new locations such as polling sites and trade union facilities.
State and local response policies for ends of protected areas
In the meantime, many states and local governments have stepped in to equip communities with important information.
The Attorney General of Massachusetts, New Mexico and New York, as well as other states, have issued guidance to nonprofits, human service organizations, places of worship, and healthcare facilities on how to respond to requests from federal immigration authorities. States, including Arizona, California, Illinois, Maryland, Indianapolis, Indianapolis, Worcester, Massachusetts, and Virginia, share statements that have repeatedly reiterated their commitments and policies to protect immigrant students and families. Local governments such as Los Angeles, Chicago, New Haven and Connecticut have launched new efforts to ensure residents know their rights in interacting with federal immigration officials.
There are limits to what states can do in places where federal immigration enforcement actions are undertaken, but states such as New York, Oregon and Washington already have laws in books that block the arrest of certain civil immigrants in certain locations.
This year, legislatures in at least seven states are considering similar legislation to better protect and limit federal immigration enforcement in certain areas.
In Maryland, the Conservation and Delicate Places Act requires the state attorney general to issue new guidance on restrictions on federal immigration enforcement actions in public schools, libraries and courts. These entities must adopt policies that match the new guidance. In Rhode Island, the Protected Spaces Act directs schools, places of worship, medical facilities and public libraries not to grant federal immigration officials access to facilities for enforcement action without a judicial warrant. The California bill requires all school districts, county offices of education and charter schools to immediately notify students, parents, staff and other community members of the immigration officers on the school’s premises.
Amidst the disruption and cancelled safeguards in protected areas, states and regions play an important role in ensuring that communities are well informed in this changing immigration enforcement environment.
Submitted below: Immigration and Customs Enforcement
