# data[].attributes.body
The U.S should not get rid of DACA

# data[].attributes.body
A girl pursued her dreams because of DACA. So it deserves our support.

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants make the U.S stronger and richer

# data[].attributes.body
The deportation of a primary source of money can lead to severe financial difficulties for the family left behind.

Loss of income can tend to result in trouble housing, food, healthcare

Costs associated with legal fees and potential relocation can hurt families

# data[].attributes.body
The sudden removal of any family member can cause a variety of severe emotional distress and trauma

Can lead to anxiety depression and other mental health issues

The fear of potentially getting deported or having family that could get deported it can create a constant state of stress each day

# data[].attributes.body
Separation can disrupt the children's education and social development and they may end up in foster care or with other family relatives

The loss of a stable family environment can have long-term negative effects on their well-being in the future

# data[].attributes.body
Establishing/strengthening community support networks can tend to provide essential resources and assistance to families who are affected by deportation

Can include legal aid, mental health services, financial assistance

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the United States today, more than 16.7 million people share a home with at least one family member, often a parent, who is undocumented. Roughly six million of these people are children under the age of 18. Consequently, immigration enforcement actions-and the ever-present threat of enforcement action-have significant physical, emotional, developmental, and economic repercussions for millions of children across the country. Deportations of parents and other family members have serious consequences that affect children-including U.S.-citizen children-and extend to entire communities and the country as a whole.

This fact sheet provides an overview of the children who are impacted by immigration enforcement actions, the challenges and risk factors that these children face, and the existing mechanisms designed to protect children if a parent is detained or deported.

Millions of U.S.-citizen children have undocumented parents and family members.

4.4 million U.S.-citizen children under the age of 18 lived with at least one undocumented parent as of 2018.

6.1 million U.S.-citizen children under the age of 18 lived with an undocumented family member as of 2018.

As many as half-a-million U.S.-citizen children experienced the deportation of at least one parent from 2011 through 2013.

As of 2017, Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders from El Salvador, Honduras, and Haiti had an estimated 273,000 U.S.-citizen children. If these TPS designations are terminated, many of these parents will become undocumented.

17.8 million children in the United States had at least one foreign-born parent, including parents who were naturalized citizens, lawfully present immigrants, or undocumented immigrants, as of 2019.

Immigration enforcement-and the threat of enforcement-can negatively impact a child's long-term health and development.

A child's risk of experiencing mental health problems like depression, anxiety, and severe psychological distress increases following the detention and/or deportation of a parent. Since late 2016, doctors and service providers report having seen more children exhibiting stress- and anxiety-related behavioral changes, including symptoms of "toxic-stress," due to fear that a family member will be deported.

Children experience toxic stress when they are suddenly separated from their parents, which negatively impacts brain development. They are also at greater risk of developing chronic mental health conditions that include depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), as well as physical conditions such as cancer, stroke, diabetes, and heart disease.

A 2010 study of immigration-related parental arrests (at home or worksites) found that the majority of children experienced at least four adverse behavioral changes in the six months following a raid or arrest. Compared to the previous six months, children cried or were afraid more often; changed their eating or sleeping habits; and/or were more anxious, withdrawn, clingy, angry, or aggressive.

A 2020 study found that the detention or deportation of a family member was associated with significantly higher rates of suicidal thought, alcohol use, and aggression among Latino adolescents in Atlanta, Georgia.

A 2020 study examined the impact on children, families, and communities of worksite raids in Ohio, Texas, and Mississippi. The study found that many of the children of workers swept up in the raids exhibited signs of PTSD, including difficulty sleeping, frequent crying, and heightened fear.

Even before birth, immigration enforcement can put a child's health at risk. The 2008 worksite raid in Postville, Iowa (the largest single-site immigration raid in U.S. history) was tied to premature and underweight births-complications that put babies at risk for infant death or long-term health problems. Researchers found that babies born to Latina mothers in Iowa within 37 weeks of the raid were 24 percent more likely to be underweight compared to births over the same amount of time one year earlier. This increased risk was not evident in babies born to non-Latina white mothers in Iowa.

Fear and uncertainty among immigrant families leads to decreased participation in Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). In turn, lack of health coverage through Medicaid/CHIP can hinder a child's healthy growth and development and threaten a family's financial stability. U.S.-citizen children with at least one parent who is an immigrant are more likely than children with U.S.-born parents to be uninsured.

Children who reside in communities that partner with ICE or are the focus of ICE raids experience negative educational outcomes.

Communities with local law enforcement agencies that choose to partner with ICE by entering into 287(g) agreements experience a large displacement of Hispanic students as families choose to leave or avoid moving into those communities. A Stanford University study analyzing the effects of 287(g) agreements on public school enrollment found that when local communities entered into 287(g) agreements between 2005 and 2010, the number of Hispanic students decreased nearly 10 percent within 2 years.

Large-scale raids by ICE can impact school attendance for students with friends or family members affected by raids. After a mass raid in eastern Tennessee occurred in April 2018, more than 500 students were absent from school the following day.

Educators surveyed in 2017 and 2018 reported several concerns related to immigration enforcement, including student absences, decline in academic performance, and less involvement from parents. Eighty-four percent of educators said students from immigrant families expressed concerns about enforcement while at school.

A 2020 study analyzed the educational outcomes of Latino students in school districts located in communities where large numbers of deportations were taking place. The study found that the number of deportations occurring in the larger community correlated with greater gaps between white and Latino students in terms of math achievement and chronic absenteeism.

The detention or deportation of a parent puts children at risk of economic instability.

The deportation, and even the arrest or detention, of a parent or other household member has significant short- and long-term financial implications. U.S.-citizen children and any remaining family members can face substantial economic disadvantages following the removal of a primary provider. In general, increases in immigration enforcement have been linked to higher poverty rates among U.S.-citizen children with parents who are likely to be undocumented.

A study of immigration enforcement in six U.S. locations between 2006 and 2009 found that families lost 40 to 90 percent of their income, or an average of 70 percent, within six months of a parent's immigration-related arrest, detention, or deportation.

The ability to afford housing may become more tenuous following the deportation of a provider, resulting in the loss of a family's home and more frequent relocations.

A 2016 study of immigration enforcement and housing foreclosures found that "deportations exacerbate rates of foreclosure among Latinos by removing income earners from owner-occupied households." Furthermore, the research revealed that counties with 287(g) agreements, which authorize immigration enforcement collaboration between local police and ICE, had substantially higher foreclosure rates among Latinos.

An analysis of 2018 Census data found that when households lose the income of an undocumented family member, the family's income falls by as much as 45 percent. An estimated 908,891 households with at least one U.S.-citizen child would fall below the poverty line if the undocumented breadwinners in those families were deported.

Children may end up in the child welfare system following the detention or deportation of a parent.

Parents-regardless of immigration status, detention, or deportation-have a constitutional right to custody of their children (unless deemed unfit). While the child welfare system generally recognizes that it is in a child's best interest to remain with a parent or family member, immigration enforcement can negatively impact parental rights and thus a child's well-being. For example, the lack of coordination between agencies has historically led to prolonged family separation and even termination of parental rights when a parent is detained or deported.

To ensure that enforcement activities did not "unnecessarily disrupt the parental rights" of parents or legal guardians of minor children, ICE issued its Parental Interests Directive in 2013. The Parental Interests Directive was replaced in 2017 with the Detained Parents Directive, which eliminated many aspects of the 2013 directive, including guidance for the use of prosecutorial discretion in cases involving children and all references to parental rights. The 2017 directive instead instructs ICE agents to "remain cognizant of the impact enforcement actions may have" on lawful permanent resident (LPR) or U.S.-citizen children.

According to ICE's 2017 Detained Parents Directive, when LPR or U.S.-citizen minor children are encountered during immigration enforcement, ICE agents should "generally accommodate" the parent or legal guardian's efforts to make childcare arrangements before contacting local child welfare or law enforcement to take temporary custody of the children.

If a parent is unable to arrange childcare or custody prior to detention or deportation, the child may be taken by the state's Child Protective Services (CPS) for placement and case management. The child is usually placed in an emergency shelter, group home, or with a relative, friend, or stranger in a foster home while custody is determined in family court.

An estimated 5,000 children in foster care had a detained or deported parent in 2011, according to a national study.

Children in foster care in counties with 287(g) agreements were 29 percent more likely to have detained or deported parents compared to non-287(g) counties studied in 2011.

There are limited mechanisms to safeguard the parental rights of parents who are detained or deported.

All parents have the right to receive a notification of custody proceedings affecting their children, attend such proceedings, and receive copies of related court documents. Yet there are few enforceable, permanent policies in place to protect these rights for parents who are detained or deported.

Federal law mandates that parental rights be terminated if a child has been out of a parent's custody for 15 of the past 22 months. Policies and procedures vary by state, but in order to maintain or regain parental rights, CPS generally implements a reunification plan that requires a parent to have regular contact with the child and participate in family court hearings. Detained or deported parents have historically faced significant barriers to these requirements.

Parents may request release from detention in order to care for their children while they are in immigration proceedings. However, ICE no longer provides its personnel with guidance for exercising such discretion in cases that involve a child.

The 2017 directive generally instructs agents to facilitate regular visitation for detained parents and their minor children, though it no longer emphasizes in-person visitation as opposed to visitation through video or teleconferencing. ICE personnel are also instructed to arrange for a detained parent's participation in custody proceedings when required by a court.

Significant issues persist for detained parents who may be dealing with both immigration and custody proceedings. Since ICE is not required to inform CPS of a parent's whereabouts, CPS may have difficulty locating and properly notifying a detained parent; family courts and caseworkers may not understand why a parent is detained and unable to participate in proceedings; and ICE officials may underestimate the impact that enforcement has on U.S.-citizen children who are likely to be left behind.

Parents with a final deportation order must make the difficult decision of whether to bring their children-including U.S.-citizen children-with them.

From 2013 to 2018, ICE deported more than 231,000 people who reported having at least one U.S.-citizen child. In 2019, ICE deported 27,980 people with U.S.-born children. While the government does not track whether U.S.-citizen children stay in the United States or leave with a deported parent, both scenarios occur and pose challenges.

If parental rights remain intact, parents with a pending deportation may make custody arrangements for their children to stay in the United States. ICE is supposed to "accommodate, to the extent practicable," a detained parent's efforts to make guardianship or travel arrangements for the child prior to deportation.

If a child's custody is still being determined after a parent has been deported, the ability of the parent to regain custody or participate in proceedings-even if the court requires the parent's attendance-is extremely limited. ICE no longer has guidance to consider facilitating the travel of a deported parent back to the United States to participate in proceedings that may result in the termination of parental rights.

Deported parents have the right to reunite with their children outside of the United States as long as the reunification plan is ongoing, but this requires significant coordination between family members, the parent country's consulate, and U.S. state and federal agencies. It can be difficult for deported parents to prove that they can provide for their children in a stable and safe environment in the country of deportation, based on many of the same conditions that may have triggered the parent's migration to the United States in the first place.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
U.S. Citizen Children Impacted by Immigration Enforcement - American Immigration Council

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Deportations of parents and family members have serious consequences that affect children and extend to communities and the country as a whole.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Deported Mothers: Mental Health and Family Separation

By Maricruz Castro Ricalde and María José Gutiérrez

has been living in Ciudad Juárez for ten years after being deported twice. The first time she migrated to the United States, she married and gave birth to her first son. She describes the multiple fears and stresses she faced living undocumented, such as "fear of people" and "fear to reveal her immigration status". After a first detention for possession of a controlled substance, she signed her voluntary deportation to Mexico, but since she had left her son behind, she decided to cross the border again undocumented.

In her narrative titled " , Maria expresses how despite her attempts to regularize her immigration status by completing her court visits, she faced a warrant for her arrest for allegedly not complying with them. At that moment she found out she was pregnant with her second child and due to her condition, Maria decided to become "a fugitive, out of fear of being incarcerated". She gave birth to her daughter who had a disability and needed special care, which caused her to remain in the US to "focus on her development". She got detained a couple of years later and despite her petition to be granted a humanitarian visa in order to take care of her daughter, who was an American citizen, she was deported to Mexico and took her daughter with her. In her words, "that's when my huge depression started and the big challenge to start over again". Upon being deported to Mexico, she started selling secondhand clothes with her daughter's help, but the wages were too low to make a living and it had negative consequences on the health of her daughter, who could not go to school, since Mexican public schools did not offer the support she needed for her disability. As María recounts, her deportation "split her family up": due to the lack of adequate services to treat her daughter's disability, Maria decided to send her back to the US. After ten years of living in Mexico, María is considering going back to the US to reunite her family, despite the memories of fear and stress caused by being an undocumented migrant. As she expresses it, "the only thing that moves me is that I want to be with my husband and daughter again".

lived in the United States for eighteen years. Her two children were born there. When she was deported, her daughter was thirteen, and her son was two. Her forced return to Mexico was "difficult, very difficult." Therefore, her two children stayed with their father. Soon she began to experience severe depression. For two years, she did not leave her home, nor did she want to live with anyone else. In her narrative titled , she talks about her family's breakup and how each of its members' destinies changed due to her deportation. Her daughter started having many problems and ended up dropping out of school.

In Tijuana, she consulted lawyers and people who told her that they would resolve her legal situation, but with no results. She began to collaborate with the organization Dreamers Moms through its founder, . That is a way of "doing a bit" to alleviate the anguish and lack of information experienced by deported people. Rocío wants to obtain a visa to visit her children in order to try to deepen family bonds despite their continued separation.

These stories are testaments to the challenging consequences of family separation due to deportation. The Humanizing Deportation archive contains more than thirty other stories of mothers emotionally affected by deportation and subsequent separation from their children, that show the growing need to enhance mental health support and integration programs within the US and Mexico.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Deported Mothers: Mental Health and Family Separation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Deported Mothers: Mental Health and Family Separation By Maricruz Castro Ricalde and María José Gutiérrez Problem Deportation of parents causes emotional and psychological impacts on women's and men's health.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Deported Mothers: Mental Health and Family Separation

By Maricruz Castro Ricalde and María José Gutiérrez

has been living in Ciudad Juárez for ten years after being deported twice. The first time she migrated to the United States, she married and gave birth to her first son. She describes the multiple fears and stresses she faced living undocumented, such as "fear of people" and "fear to reveal her immigration status". After a first detention for possession of a controlled substance, she signed her voluntary deportation to Mexico, but since she had left her son behind, she decided to cross the border again undocumented.

In her narrative titled " , Maria expresses how despite her attempts to regularize her immigration status by completing her court visits, she faced a warrant for her arrest for allegedly not complying with them. At that moment she found out she was pregnant with her second child and due to her condition, Maria decided to become "a fugitive, out of fear of being incarcerated". She gave birth to her daughter who had a disability and needed special care, which caused her to remain in the US to "focus on her development". She got detained a couple of years later and despite her petition to be granted a humanitarian visa in order to take care of her daughter, who was an American citizen, she was deported to Mexico and took her daughter with her. In her words, "that's when my huge depression started and the big challenge to start over again". Upon being deported to Mexico, she started selling secondhand clothes with her daughter's help, but the wages were too low to make a living and it had negative consequences on the health of her daughter, who could not go to school, since Mexican public schools did not offer the support she needed for her disability. As María recounts, her deportation "split her family up": due to the lack of adequate services to treat her daughter's disability, Maria decided to send her back to the US. After ten years of living in Mexico, María is considering going back to the US to reunite her family, despite the memories of fear and stress caused by being an undocumented migrant. As she expresses it, "the only thing that moves me is that I want to be with my husband and daughter again".

lived in the United States for eighteen years. Her two children were born there. When she was deported, her daughter was thirteen, and her son was two. Her forced return to Mexico was "difficult, very difficult." Therefore, her two children stayed with their father. Soon she began to experience severe depression. For two years, she did not leave her home, nor did she want to live with anyone else. In her narrative titled , she talks about her family's breakup and how each of its members' destinies changed due to her deportation. Her daughter started having many problems and ended up dropping out of school.

In Tijuana, she consulted lawyers and people who told her that they would resolve her legal situation, but with no results. She began to collaborate with the organization Dreamers Moms through its founder, . That is a way of "doing a bit" to alleviate the anguish and lack of information experienced by deported people. Rocío wants to obtain a visa to visit her children in order to try to deepen family bonds despite their continued separation.

These stories are testaments to the challenging consequences of family separation due to deportation. The Humanizing Deportation archive contains more than thirty other stories of mothers emotionally affected by deportation and subsequent separation from their children, that show the growing need to enhance mental health support and integration programs within the US and Mexico.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Deported Mothers: Mental Health and Family Separation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Deported Mothers: Mental Health and Family Separation By Maricruz Castro Ricalde and María José Gutiérrez Problem Deportation of parents causes emotional and psychological impacts on women's and men's health.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
U.S. Risks Decline And Stagnation Without Immigrants

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Research shows without immigrants the U.S. labor force will shrink, and America risks stagnation and declining living standards.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Policy Analysis for California Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

In California, a state of 10.6 million immigrants, 2.2 million immigrants are undocumented, roughly 125,000 of whom are children under the age of 16. 1 One in five U.S. citizen children in California, or 1.7 million young people, lives with at least one undocumented family member. 2 Consequently, immigration policies and enforcement as well as anti-immigrant actions can powerfully influence the lives of millions of students in the state.

Immigration enforcement has significant, long-lasting consequences for undocumented immigrants and their children. Immigration-related arrests and deportations contribute to income, housing, and childcare instability. 3 In addition, children of undocumented parents have higher rates of mental health issues, 4 lower rates of preschool enrollment, 5 and less access to medical care 6 than their peers.

The negative effects of immigration-enforcement activity, restrictive immigration policies, and anti-immigrant rhetoric extend far beyond families with undocumented immigrant members. Studies of immigration-enforcement effects have found high associations between immigration enforcement and school mobility, 7 decreased academic performance, 8 and declining social-emotional well-being among Latinx students generally, regardless of their or their families' status. 9

To date, few studies have analyzed the effects of the Trump administration's implementation of harsher enforcement tactics and restrictive immigration and asylum policies on student outcomes. In this brief, which is based on a study published in AERA Open, 10 we describe the association between immigration enforcement and educational outcomes for students in seven of the eight California CORE districts-the eight largest school districts in California, collectively serving more than one million students. Using data spanning the 2014-18 school years (from President Barack Obama's second term through the first year and a half of President Donald Trump's administration), we examined how changes in county-level immigration arrests by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) occurring under distinct national political contexts related to changes in students' math and English language arts (ELA) achievement and absenteeism. We also show how students' perceptions of school climate, supports for academic learning, sense of belonging, lack of school safety, and bullying changed under different immigration policy contexts and enforcement rates.

Policy Context

When President Trump took office in January 2017, he launched an aggressive, systematic policy agenda to block migration and asylum seeking to the United States, limit the rights of immigrants and their dependents, and pursue large-scale detention and deportation of immigrants. 11 Despite the record-breaking rates of deportation that occurred under Obama's presidency, the Trump administration's approach signaled an embrace of more widespread immigration enforcement that would be expanded through numerous policies and actions as well as vociferous anti-immigrant rhetoric throughout his presidency. 12

With the passage of the California Values Act (Senate Bill 54) and its implementation beginning in January 2018, California became a "sanctuary state." This law prohibited the use of state or local resources to assist federal immigration enforcement, and schools, hospitals, and courthouses were designated "safe spaces" from which ICE agents were barred. Police officers and sheriffs were also forbidden from asking individuals about their immigration status, arresting them on the sole grounds of having a deportation order, or sharing personal information like home addresses with ICE or the U.S. Border Patrol (unless publicly available). Despite this state law, high levels of federal immigration activity have been sustained in the state. For example, more than 30,000 people were deported from California during the 2019 fiscal year, and a record 80,000 deportation proceedings were filed in California immigration courts that same year for individuals without felony, national security, terrorism, or other criminal charges.

In the counties served by the CORE districts, the number of immigration arrests varies by county and over time. We compiled data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse examining the number of arrests that occurred during the school year from 2014-15 to 2017-18. Los Angeles County had the greatest number of immigration arrests consistently each year, although the number of arrests declined from 2014-15 to 2015-16 and then slightly increased during the following school years. The other four counties had an increase in the number of immigration arrests from 2014-15 to 2015-16, with Sacramento and Alameda Counties experiencing increases each subsequent year.

Finding 1: Achievement, Attendance, and School Climate and Safety Decline for Latinx and Latinx English Learners as Immigration Arrests Increase

We compared changes in academic and nonacademic measures during periods with greater and fewer incidents of immigration arrests. In our analysis, we found consistent evidence that Latinx and Latinx English learner (EL) students experienced declines in achievement, attendance, and perceptions of school climate and safety when more immigration arrests occurred in the counties where their schools were located. Of all the student populations we examined, evidence of immigration-enforcement effects is most consistent for these two subgroups. These measures did not decline for non-Latinx students (White, Black, and Asian American students) as immigration arrests increased.

We examined outcomes for elementary and secondary students separately, where secondary refers to students in sixth grade and up. Figure 1 illustrates the magnitude of the changes in academic and nonacademic measures for Latinx and Latinx EL secondary students for every one standard deviation of immigration arrests scaled by the percentage of the county-level population that is foreign born. Consistent with previous research, we scaled the number of immigration arrests by county foreign-born population to account for some counties being larger than others and having more immigrant-origin inhabitants. For example, a standard deviation of immigration arrests in Sacramento County is approximately 500 arrests, whereas for Fresno County this number is approximately 350.

Figure 1. Declines in Educational Outcomes With Increases in Immigration Arrests

When immigration arrests increased, secondary Latinx students reported more incidents of bullying or experiencing a lack of safety, felt less of a sense of belonging, experienced declines in school attendance, and had lower achievement in math. Figure 1 shows these declines in standard deviation units so that the magnitude of the associations can be compared across outcomes. The largest declines in students' outcomes were observed for sense of safety and bullying.

We observed greater declines for Latinx ELs for several of the measures, including perception of school safety and attendance rates. We did not find a link between immigration arrests and ELA scores for Latinx students but found that immigration arrests did relate to declines in ELA scores for Latinx ELs. Using rough conversion estimates from other researchers, the declines in achievement equal a loss of two months of learning in math and one month of learning in ELA for Latinx ELs. 13 This also translates into two additional days of absence for Latinx ELs. When examining results for Latinx EL elementary students, we found slightly smaller yet still meaningful evidence of declines in math, ELA, and attendance with increases in immigration arrests. We did not find evidence of a relationship between immigration arrests and non-EL Latinx elementary student outcomes.

Finding 2: Declines Related to Immigration Arrests Were Sharper During the Trump Administration

Our analysis found that the strength of the association between immigration arrests and students' academic and nonacademic outcomes was greater in the years when Trump was president. Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the magnitude of these findings for secondary and elementary students, respectively. Comparing the yellow and blue bars for each outcome individually, the associated impacts from immigration arrests to student outcomes were more consistent and stronger during the Trump administration. Most notably, the association between immigration arrests and perceptions of secondary Latinx EL students that their teachers and schools were respectful and fair was twice as large when arrests occurred under the Trump administration compared with arrests that occurred under the Obama administration. An increase of one standard deviation in immigration arrests during the Trump administration was associated with absences of approximately two and a half days, compared with one and a half days under the Obama administration.

Figure 2. Impacts of Immigration Enforcement on Secondary Latinx English Learners' Academics, Attendance, and Perceptions of School Climate and Safety

Figure 3. Impacts of Immigration Enforcement on Elementary Latinx English Learners' Academics and Attendance

The differences in magnitude of these findings suggest that heightened immigration enforcement effectuated in a national context of expanded xenophobic rhetoric 14 may be tied to strong and pervasive educational damage for Latinx EL students.

Discussion

Our results identify several important patterns associated with immigration arrests, including evidence of worse outcomes for students when arrests occur under a more vocally xenophobic president 15 who removed deportation protections for noncriminals. Our findings confirm prior research documenting educational penalties that accompany heightened enforcement activity for Latinx students. 16 The totality of the consequences stemming from school absences driven by immigration arrests remains to be seen, but students tend to suffer when they are not consistently attending school, 17 and immigration-enforcement activity and threats have interrupted many students' regular attendance patterns and ability to learn effectively even when in school.

Our significant findings for the negative effects of nearby immigration-enforcement activity on students' math scores is consistent with earlier work 18 and aligns with evidence showing that math achievement tends to be most affected by disruptions to the learning context. 19 Because math instruction tends to be sequential, requiring students to build on concepts and theories taught in prior weeks, missing multiple days of school or being unable to grasp or retain complex information-even for a short period of time-may produce greater learning gaps.

Finally, our results underscore the powerful implications that immigration enforcement may have for multiple aspects of a school's culture and climate, ranging from students' perceptions of fairness and respect to their experiences of bullying as well as their sense of safety and belonging. In this way, our findings demonstrate how immigration enforcement can function as an act of community violence-i.e., an event that produces individual- and community-level trauma 20 -that penetrates deeply into the educational lives of immigrant-origin youth and their peers. 21 Our data show that a broad swath of the student body-not just those students whose family members are directly targeted by ICE-perceive negative changes in the feeling and functioning of a school when enforcement activity rises. Therefore, this study provides an example of the value of using a wider analytic lens to measure the consequences of immigration enforcement both empirically and theoretically through the framework of a pyramid of enforcement effects. 22

Recommendations

Here we present research-based practices that have shown promise for creating safe, welcoming school environments for vulnerable students, including immigrant-origin students confronted with immigration enforcement and anti-immigrant policies, practices, and rhetoric. We also suggest avenues for further research to better understand what schools and school districts can and are doing to make schools safe spaces for students and families affected by immigration enforcement.

Implement Inclusive and Supportive Policies and Practices for Immigrant-Origin Students

For students to perceive schools as safe, they must feel confident that they will be protected against physical and emotional violence that could negatively affect their well-being. Inclusive policies that consider immigrant-origin students' needs, including those related to immigration status and enforcement, may help establish the necessary foundation for creating secure, welcoming environments.

Implement and enforce policies against racism, xenophobia, sexism, homophobia, and other forms of oppression. All schools should have clear, stringently enforced policies that address any forms of bullying, harassment, and assault. These must be accompanied by comprehensive training for school personnel tasked with enforcing the policies and well-articulated expectations of their responsibility to intervene when incidents of victimization occur. Researchers at GLSEN (formerly the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network) found that having such policies, along with their systematic enforcement, is strongly associated with positive reports of belonging, safety, and behavioral and academic engagement from lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) students. 23

Limit barriers to access and ensure confidentiality and privacy protections are enforced. Schools should eliminate any potential obstacles that may dissuade students or their families from participating in educational activities or availing themselves of school resources. For example, districts should minimize identification requirements for school enrollment, participation in any school-related programs, or borrowing district-issued equipment. Additionally, districts should adhere to the California Department of Education's strict policies on student privacy and should widely publicize their efforts to protect personal data and avoid disclosing contact information. 24

Allow for flexible modes of learning in times of heightened insecurity. Increased student absenteeism is one of the multiple educational consequences associated with nearby immigration-enforcement activity. Policies that allow students to continue to access educational content and instruction via remote learning options under special circumstances such as ICE activity in the community would prevent unnecessary loss-of-learning opportunities. Virtual and hybrid learning formats and policies developed during the COVID-19 pandemic may offer models for how to successfully engage students who may temporarily be unable to attend in person because of these disruptions.

Adopt inclusive curricula and in-school practices. There is abundant evidence of the importance of relevant, meaningful learning opportunities for students of all backgrounds to foster sustained academic engagement, cross-cultural learning, and achievement. 25 Efforts to ensure that students see themselves and their families reflected in curricular materials, school-wide events, speakers, and school personnel should attend to all aspects of young people's identities, including their families' histories, cultures, languages, ethnicities, races, gender identities, and migration experiences. Thoughtful, deliberate decision-making about what is taught in classrooms and what messages are being communicated in the school building about who belongs can powerfully affect how immigrant-origin (and other) student populations feel in and about their schools.

Show "visible displays of support" for immigrant-origin students and communities. GLSEN has documented the power of "visible displays of support" for improving school climate, sense of safety and belonging, and school engagement and performance for LGBTQ+ students. 26 Schools should commit to demonstrating support for immigrant-origin students and communities explicitly or "signaling affirmation" 27 and can do so in a number of ways: (a) visual, public displays, such as signs and posters; (b) written forms of affirmation, such as emails of support from administration; and (c) verbal affirmation from educators who speak directly to students in classrooms. All have been shown to have a positive influence on students' sense of belonging and acceptance in school. 28

Implement Inclusive and Supportive Practices for Immigrant Families

Ensure access to adequate translation and interpretation services. Despite federal and state laws mandating that school districts provide education-related information to families in languages that they understand, serious obstacles still exist. At a minimum, schools should guarantee that family members have access to appropriate translations and, when necessary, interpretation services when they attend school events, interact with school personnel, and receive any information about their children's education. These services should be well advertised in multiple formats and outlets so that families know they exist and see their children's schools making concerted efforts to engage with them.

Provide information to immigrant families about legal and educational rights and services. To foster stronger ties with immigrant families, districts should provide information about immigrants' legal and educational rights and direct them to available services and supports. This may include hosting legal workshops and "know your rights" events and serving as a liaison between families and community members with resources and expertise in these areas. School districts can also affirmatively demonstrate their commitment to inclusion of undocumented students and families through visible messages and outreach as well as by reducing the complexity and demands of school-enrollment procedures.

Training and Support for School Personnel

Principals, teachers, social workers, school psychologists, and other personnel working in classrooms have daily direct contact with students living in a national context of restrictive immigration policies, enforcement, and xenophobia. 29 As a result, they may be best positioned to identify and respond to students who are experiencing the detrimental effects of these harmful policies. Yet school personnel are rarely taught about immigration policies and immigrants' rights or trained to address the consequences of students' immigration-related fears, anxiety, and trauma. 30

Districts with large immigrant-origin student populations should mandate trainings that include basic information about immigrants' rights (including, for example, the Supreme Court ruling in Plyler v. Doe 31 that guarantees all students a right to free, basic K-12 public education regardless of legal status), publicly available services (e.g., Medi-Cal), and district and school policies that protect students' and families' privacy and ensure their safety in and around the school building. Given the extent of the trauma that many students experience stemming from immigration enforcement, migration journeys, family separations, living with legal uncertainty, or other related challenges, school personnel should be trained in trauma-informed educational practices and care. Finally, for immigrant-origin students to thrive, districts must know about and take seriously anti-immigrant hate and oppression as well as prepare school personnel to intervene in the face of discrimination. District and school leaders should train staff to respond to victimization, racism, and any forms of bias and discrimination-including anti-immigrant hate-and emphasize educators' responsibilities to intervene when such incidents occur. In doing so, they will demonstrate to all members of the school community that creating and maintaining a welcoming environment for all students is a priority.

Directions for Future Research

The findings presented in this brief, along with the suggested policies and practices, lay the foundation for important new directions for research. First, there is a need for more case studies that examine whether and how schools have implemented any of the recommended or other practices to create supportive environments for families that may have been affected by ICE activity. 32 Finally, researchers should explore district and school leaders' preparedness to address immigrant families' needs and identify knowledge and resource gaps to facilitate improved supports for school personnel and families in these critical areas. 33

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
PACE - Effects of Immigration Enforcement on Students in California

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This study examines the associations between county-level immigration arrests and academic achievement, absenteeism, and measures of school climate and safety for students in the California CORE districts. We found consistent evidence that Latinx and Latinx English learner students experienced declines in academic achievement, attendance, and perceptions of school climate and safety when there were more immigration arrests in the counties where their schools were located.

# data[].attributes.body
a. The articles overall thesis is that DACA shouldn't be pulled and how America has relied on immigrants since the begining of time., and now to say it's unethical would costs thousands of people to destroy the U.S economy.

b. "Studies show that in 2018, the rate of participation within the labor force of foreign born workers was approximately 65.7% which is higher than the Native born percentage that contributed" (paragraph 4)

"According to the Bureau of Economic Research immigrants are responsible for approximately 36% of all current innovation within The United States" (paragraph 5)

"Most skilled immigrants help their U.S. born colleagues further increase and develop innovation along with productivity"(paragraph 5)