Legal Issues Pertaining to Undocumented Students and Employees featured (from left to right) Edward Burger, president of
Southwestern University (TX); Natasha J. Baker, partner at Hirshfeld Kramer LLP; Judith Maxwell Greig, president of
Notre Dame de Namur University (CA); and Paul C. Pribbenow, president of
Augsburg College (MN).
Session Explores Legal Issues Pertaining to Undocumented Students and Employees
During an engaging and timely concurrent session, more than 60 presidents and higher education leaders discussed the status of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and other immigration issues that can affect campuses. Since the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the protections for undocumented persons provided by DACA have been considered vulnerable, potentially affecting thousands of students, staff, and faculty members. A higher education attorney and two college presidents discussed options campus leaders might consider to protect members of their campus communities.
Panelist Natasha J. Baker, partner of Hirshfeld Kramer LLP, began by
defining terms (PDF). Perhaps the most confusing term, noted Baker, is “sanctuary campus,” which has no legal definition. A holdover term from medieval Europe, when churches could be considered sanctuaries for those needing refuge, there is no legal status for any building or location in current U.S. law. There is, however, a concept of sensitive locations, where immigration enforcement actions are discouraged. A 2011 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement memo stated that “access to campuses” may only take place when prior approval is obtained from an appropriate supervisory official or there are exigent circumstances necessitating immediate action without supervisor approval.
According to Baker—who noted at the start of the session that the presentation does not constitute legal advice, and presidents should consult with counsel to determine the best strategy for their particular institution—enforcement actions could include arrest or detention of individuals, interviews, and searches or raids. Actions could also target institutional records. Baker noted that the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) would require a subpoena for student records.
For campuses that declare themselves “sanctuary” locations, Baker said possible consequences could include loss of federal funding and harboring or obstruction of justice charges. But she said it is too soon to know whether these consequences would be pursued by the government.
Baker stated that concerned campuses could take a number of steps to support those with DACA status or those who are undocumented on campus:
- Enforce policies that prohibit harassment or bullying on the basis of actual or perceived immigration status;
- Evaluate the level of access provided to immigration authorities for deportations or raids, should this occur; and
- Evaluate external access to student records where such records contain information about that student’s immigration status or other personal information.
Panelist Judith Maxwell Greig, president of
Notre Dame de Namur University (CA), explained that the university was the first private Hispanic-serving institution in northern California. About 60 percent of Notre Dame de Namur lower-division students are first generation, and about 50 percent receive Pell grants. Undocumented students receive state financial aid, but not federal.
Foremost, Greig said, her campus is trying to calm fears and focus on education. Although the campus has a strong history of activism, no student has asked the university to be a “sanctuary campus.” She and her leadership team have been in discussions with a variety of constituents. She said members of her board of trustees are concerned about their fiduciary responsibilities, and the Catholic Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur on the board also are concerned about the safety of the DACA students.
Greig said the lack of legal status in the U.S. for sanctuary is a central point to consider. Some Sisters and some campus faculty members would like to declare the university a sanctuary. Within the campus, they are trying to provide counseling and pastoral care as well as referrals to legal resources, without bringing attention to or endangering DACA students. Her university would be unable to operate without the federal support through Pell grants and other financial aid.
Paul C. Pribbenow, president of
Augsburg College (MN), said the college has been slowly developing a culture of radical hospitality since 2007. Radical hospitality, he said, “recognizes that increasingly, undocumented students are raised right here in the United States. Augsburg—and every other higher education institution—must heed the call to educate students of ability.” After the DACA program began in 2012, Minnesota created the 2013 Minnesota Dream Act that made undocumented students eligible for state aid and in-state tuition. In the same year, the Institute for Mexicans Abroad provided scholarships for Augsburg students of Mexican heritage, a program that has continued in subsequent years.
Pribbenow said Augsburg is part of United We Dream, an organization working toward education equity in access; experiential learning through research, internships, and community engagement; and empowering undocumented and DACA students to self-advocate, persist, and graduate. Currently, Augsburg has 45–60 DACA students, and 50 percent of entering students are students of color.
Augsburg developed a decision-making process that Pribbenow believes has been extremely valuable. Called
“Public Will,” (PDF) the process asks seven key questions to determine if the college should take a stand on an issue, and if so what its position should be. This process will guide deliberations about Augsburg’s response to immigration actions and related issues.
Discussion among several presidents followed with differing positions on the idea of a sanctuary campus and how best to support DACA and other undocumented students. Each speaker confirmed the wisdom of working with college or university counsel, as well as an attorney well versed in immigration law.
The Presidential Forum on Diversity and Inclusion featured presidents (from left to right) Marvin Krislov of
Oberlin College (OH), Lester C. Newman of
Jarvis Christian College (TX), Thomas R. Rochon of
Ithaca College (NY), Dennis H. Holtschneider, CM, of
DePaul University (IL), and Nancy Oliver Gray, of
Hollins University (VA).
Forum Addresses Role of Presidents in Shaping Diverse, Inclusive Campuses
Other Presidents Institute sessions addressed how to foster a welcoming, inclusive campus culture where students, faculty, and staff are free to express their views while remaining respectful of those who disagree. Notably, for the first time, the Institute hosted a Presidential Forum on Diversity and Inclusion. The candid discussion began with observations from college and university presidents who have encountered concerns about inequity, injustice, diversity, inclusion, or free expression on their campuses. The session was led by moderator Nancy Oliver Gray, president of
Hollins University (VA), and featured panelists Dennis H. Holtschneider, CM, president of
DePaul University (IL), Marvin Krislov, president of
Oberlin College (OH), Lester C. Newman, president of
Jarvis Christian College (TX), and Thomas R. Rochon, president of
Ithaca College (NY).
Opening the session, Gray shared that Hollins University had administered a campus climate survey in November 2015. Overall, the survey data suggested that Hollins had a welcoming and respectful environment for students, faculty, and staff but that there were significant differences in perceptions and experiences depending on race, ethnicity, gender, and political perspective. For example, students of color rated the campus less welcoming and less respectful than the overall rating. “The good news,” she said, “was that an overwhelming majority of survey participants said ‘we can do better’ and ‘we want to do better.’”
The university’s leadership identified several actions they could take to foster a more inclusive and diverse community: offer professional development for faculty and staff members; provide leadership training for students; offer new educational programs and activities for students during orientation; review and change hiring procedures; hire a new diversity officer; engage in dialogues with community members; and appoint an on-campus heritage committee to study the institutional history of slavery with representatives joining other colleges and universities studying the same issues.
Rochon shared some lessons learned regarding campus unrest. Ithaca College has 6,500 students, usually described as “liberal and diverse,” he said. The college had rapidly changed from 11 percent minority to 22 percent minority in recent years. When Ithaca adopted a strategic plan in 2009, it contained some inclusion elements, “but we were more focused on diversity than on inclusion and did not give systematic thought to how greater diversity would create inclusion challenges.” At one point, a prominent alumnus came on campus to speak as part of a panel. The alum, a white male, was a co-panelist with an African American female and used “racially tone-deaf language,” Rochon said. This led to a backlash on campus, and the administration building was occupied for ten days. One lesson of that experience, he said, was the need to understand not only how students use social media for organizing but also how they use it to convey their perceptions and demands to the world. “Protests like these can divide the campus community…. It is so important to keep the dialogue at the high levels of mission, vision, free speech, and how we achieve our educational goals,” Rochon concluded.
Newman said that Jarvis Christian College, a historically black college, has quadrupled in size in recent years and its student diversity has changed from 95 percent African American to 78 percent African American. But we “did not focus sufficient attention to supporting the needs of non-African American students after admitting them,” he acknowledged. “You should not always assume that because we are an HBCU that we don’t bring certain biases and prejudices to the table—therefore, we revised our freshman-year program to include discussions and activities to promote diversity and inclusion and altered our chapel services to provide spiritual support for students from varying faiths and religions,” he explained.
Newman recited a racial conflict that first appeared to involve the Jarvis baseball team, which is about 95 percent white and Hispanic. Administrators initially hoped to address the situation quickly, but later realized members of the baseball team were not the only students involved—white, Hispanic, and black students took part. After an investigation, 30 students were removed from campus.
“It was imperative that we communicated the full story before rumors and social media posts distorted the true story. We briefed our board, our alumni, and our parents. We wanted them to know that the campus was safe.” In addition, Newman said, “We started to offer workshops and training to provide our students, faculty, and staff with a better understanding of the differences in culture and the need to be sensitive and accepting of a diverse student body. We currently have an Office of Cultural Diversity. Through the efforts of the office, we have witnessed greater engagement of our diverse student body. That’s part of who we are and the strength of the institution,” Newman concluded.
The other panelists shared stories and identified actions they have taken to foster a more inclusive and diverse community. The session ended with a wide-ranging open dialogue among Institute participants.