ICE in Schools: 23 States, 40 Bills and 11 New Laws

ICE in schools has turned into a state-by-state question in 2026, and most of the states that tried to answer it this year did not finish the job. At least 23 states considered at least 40 proposals governing federal immigration officers and K-12 public schools, according to an NPR review published Nov. 12, but only 11 of those proposals had become law by the start of the school year. A principal’s legal footing when an agent walks into the front office now depends on the state.

That matters now because the federal rule that once settled the question is gone, and nothing has replaced it in statute. School leaders and researchers have linked federal enforcement to falling enrollment, NPR reported, and cases like the San Diego third-grader detained at an ICE check-in keep it in front of parents.

What the 2026 proposals tried to do	Number of proposals
Limit federal officers’ access to K-12 campuses and students	35
Ensure schools cooperate with ICE (Mississippi)	1
Neither expand nor limit access or cooperation	4
Total reviewed	40
Became law by the start of the 2026-27 school year	11

Source: NPR review of state legislative proposals on immigration enforcement and K-12 schools introduced in 2026, published Nov. 12, 2026. Tuition proposals challenging Plyler v. Doe were excluded from NPR’s count.

Why states are writing rules DHS used to set

For more than a decade, limits on enforcement at schools came from agency guidance: a 2011 ICE “sensitive locations” memo, later replaced by the 2021 DHS guidelines on “protected areas.” Neither was a statute or regulation, so either could be withdrawn at will. The current administration withdrew the 2021 guidelines in January 2025. A DHS statement at the time, quoted by NPR, said, “Criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest.” DHS has since said that ICE does not raid or target schools, according to NPR.

Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, told NPR the rescission is likely what is driving state action, calling the bills “belts and suspenders.”

Minnesota, Arizona, Delaware, Georgia, Maine and Nebraska considered restricting ICE access, some by requiring a warrant and others by limiting what school police may do. West Virginia, Hawaii and Kansas tried to designate campuses as sensitive locations under state law; none of those three passed. At least eight states already had laws on immigration enforcement and K-12 schools at the start of 2026, and Connecticut, Maryland and Oregon considered more. Mississippi went the other way, passing a law that requires government entities, including school districts, to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.

How far a state law on ICE in schools can reach

Rules for staff stand on firm ground. Under the Supreme Court’s anti-commandeering cases, Printz v. United States (1997) and Murphy v. NCAA (2018), the federal government cannot force states to carry out federal programs. A state can therefore tell its own teachers, principals and campus police not to help with civil immigration enforcement.

Rules aimed at federal agents are shakier. Under the Supremacy Clause and the doctrine of intergovernmental immunity, states generally cannot regulate how federal officers do their jobs. The Justice Department has already sued Portland and St. Paul over local bans on masked federal agents. Any school law worded as a direct command to ICE is likely to draw the same kind of challenge.

Warrant requirements mostly codify existing law. ICE’s civil arrest warrants, Forms I-200 and I-205, are signed by immigration officers, not judges. Under the Fourth Amendment, they do not by themselves authorize entry into areas closed to the public without consent. A law requiring staff to demand a judicial warrant before letting agents past the front office largely writes into state law what school attorneys already advise. Student records are separately protected by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, which generally requires parental consent, a court order or a lawfully issued subpoena for release. Without a warrant or subpoena, agents “don’t get in,” Andrea Garza, a school leader with United Independent School District in Laredo, Texas, told NPR.

Texas shows the limits from the other side. State law there bars local entities, including campus police, from obstructing federal immigration enforcement, and NPR found no Texas law that directly addresses how much access officers should have inside K-12 schools. The same tension runs through Houston’s ICE cooperation order, while New York’s 287(g) ban shows the opposite approach surviving in court so far.

The next round

The open questions are whether states where bills stalled refile in January, and whether the Justice Department challenges any of the 11 new laws, which would test the line between regulating school staff and regulating federal agents. Only a federal statute could bind every future administration, and even with control of Congress changing hands in January, such a bill would need the president’s signature.

NPR left out a separate set of bills that would let schools charge tuition to children without lawful status, a direct challenge to Plyler v. Doe, the 1982 ruling guaranteeing free K-12 schooling regardless of status. Those are the proposals most likely to reach federal court if one passes.

This article is for general information and is not legal advice.

Sources

Vasanth Vaidyanathan, Esq.

Administrator

Vasanth Vaidyanathan is an immigration attorney with over 20 years of experience focused exclusively on U.S. immigration and nationality law. He holds an LL.M. from California Western School of Law, San Diego and advises individuals and businesses on employment and family-based immigration matters, including H-1B, PERM, EB categories, and adjustment of status. He has also been a featured speaker at immigration seminars across the U.S. To reach Vasanth visit: https://www.vnathan.com/

Author's website Author's posts