Although ICE policy regulates immigration raids in schools, raids targeting students continue to occur – SQ policy is insufficiently regulatory
Hanson 5/4 (Jessica, NILC Skadden Fellow, 5/4/17, “School Settings Are Sensitive Locations That Should Be Off-Limits to Immigration Enforcement”, National Immigration Law Center, https://www.nilc.org/news/the-torch/5-4-17/) CS
The federal executive branch used to recognize the critical and sensitive nature of access to education. In various iterations of guidance dating back to 1993, immigration enforcement authorities have recognized schools as “sensitive locations” where no immigration enforcement activity should take place except with certain rare exceptions. Unfortunately, this guidance does not carry the weight of law, so it’s not enforceable against the agencies that are supposed to follow it. Since Donald Trump was elected president, advocates have wondered whether the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) “Sensitive Locations” memo, last published in 2011, would be rescinded. To date, it has not been. But though the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) insists that it is still following the policies laid out in the memo, its agents recently have conducted enforcement activities that blatantly violate the memo’s letter and spirit. One such incident occurred on February 28—at a school. ICE officers detained Romulo Avelica Gonzalez as he was dropping one of his four children off at school in Los Angeles. His 13-year-old daughter, who was still in the car with his wife, sobbed while watching her father being physically restrained. The collective trauma the incident caused that school’s other students was so great that the school’s leadership called an assembly of the entire student body to reflect on the incident, attempt to assuage fears, and encourage students to make a safety plan with their families. Mr. Avelica Gonzalez’s arrest has sparked new fears in parents about whether they can safely bring their children to school, or whether it would be best to keep the kids at home, where they’ll be secure. This chilling of access to school for the children of immigrant families is a travesty and a shame.
Trump intends to order ICE Officials into school – Perception alone means the plan is key
Sargent 2/16 (Greg, Opinion Writer for the Washington Post, Washington Post, 2-16-2017, "How bad will Trump’s mass deportations get? Here’s a big thing to watch for," https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/02/20/how-bad-are-trumps-mass-deportations-going-to-get-heres-a-big-thing-to-watch-for/?utm_term=.3413677635a1) KEN
Over the weekend, two memos signed by new Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly were leakedto the media, revealing plans to dramatically expand the pool of undocumented immigrants who will be targeted for deportation under President Trump. Though the memos are not yet official policy, they suggest Trump’s vow of mass deportations could, in some form, soon become a reality. But buried in the memos is a separate provision that is worthy of attention on its own. That provision, immigration lawyers tell me, raises the possibilitythat under Trump, enforcement officers will have an easier time than under President Obama of arresting undocumented immigrantswho are in schools or hospitals or are seeking sanctuary in churches. This would be politically explosive if it came to pass, and a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security just told me that the Obama-era protection of people in such venues will remain in place. But immigration and civil rights lawyers tell me they still want to see a much firmer assurance to this effect once DHS formally announces the new deportation policies. And they say fears are already circulating in immigration communitiesthat these protections will not meaningfully exist under Trump. The worry arises from a line in one of the newly leaked memos stating that “all existing” Homeland Security “memoranda or field guidance” regarding enforcement “are hereby immediately rescinded,” with a few exceptions. What this means is that the Obama DHS memos implementing his enforcement priorities — in which longtime residents and low-level offenders were deprioritized for removal, focusing enforcement resources on criminals and recent border-crossers — are getting scrapped. This is in keeping with Trump’s recently released executive order doing the same and is the basis for the belief that a much bigger pool of undocumented immigrants will now be targeted for removal, meaning mass deportations are coming. But this line could also meansomething else: If all previous Obama DHS memos are rescinded, this would theoretically include another Obama-era memo, one that protectsundocumented immigrants in places such as schools and churches. That memo is known as the “sensitive locations memo,” and it establishes that enforcement actions will not take place in “sensitive locations” such as schools, hospitals and places of worship, without express consent from agency supervisors, and must be exercised with excessive care. It was most recently affirmed under Obama in a 2016 version, and advocates say this is necessary to ensure a fundamental humanitarian commitment: that undocumented immigrants can attend school or places of worship or seek needed medical care. “The new memo raises the question of whether DHS will abandon or narrow the sensitive locations policy,” Joanne Lin, senior legislative counsel with the ACLU, tells me. “For decades, immigration enforcement has refrained from conducting actions at certain community sites, recognizing that they are sacrosanct and must be kept open to all people.” “A rollback of this policy would make immigrants think twice about seeking medical care and make parents doubt whether they should send their kids to school,” adds Kamal Essaheb, director of policy and advocacy at the National Immigration Law Center. “It would destabilize day-to-day life for communities.” Asked for comment, Gillian Christensen, a spokesperson for DHS, emailed: “The sensitive locations memo will remainin place.” But advocates insist this is not yet a firm enough commitment, for several reasons. DHS will soon release the final version of its deportation guidance memos, and David Nakamura reports that the newly leaked draft memos are currently being reviewed by White House counsel for potential changes. If the final versions rescind all previous memosand do not make an exception for sensitive locations — as is the case with the current drafts — the commitment to defending sensitive locations will remain ambiguous. The final version needs to explicitly exempt the sensitive locations memo. What’s more, the ACLU’s Lin points to reports that Latino men were recently arrested after leaving a church hypothermia center on a winter night. In that case, DHS claimed the sensitive locations policy had been followed, but Lin points out that this raises questions about the administration’s commitment to “actually upholding the spirit and purpose of that policy.” Now, it’s perfectly plausible that Trump’s DHS may clarify that it remains fully committed to the sensitive locations policy and may do so in practice. But it’s worth noting that Trump and his advisers have deliberately kept their intentions on deportations vague, sometimes suggesting that only criminals will be targeted, even as the concrete policies that are emerging seem to target many millions more. This ambiguity, some advocates think, is deliberately designed to instill fear among undocumented immigrants, perhaps encouraging them to “self-deport.”“If the commitment to the sensitive locations policy also remains vague, the broader effect may be that undocumented immigrants and their families stay away from schools, hospitals, churches, and mosques,” immigration attorney David Leopold says. “That could serve the larger end of instilling fear and panic in the community, which could encourage people to leave the country, regardless of their contributions and family ties.” So this bears watching.