Tag: Signs

  • Oklahoma Governor Signs Mandatory One-Year School Cellphone Ban Into Law – The 74

    Oklahoma Governor Signs Mandatory One-Year School Cellphone Ban Into Law – The 74


    Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    OKLAHOMA CITY — Gov. Kevin Stitt has signed into law a yearlong ban on student cellphone use in all Oklahoma public schools.

    Oklahoma will join 11 other states that have implemented similar statewide restrictions. Some school districts in the state enforce a similar policy already.

    Stitt signed Senate Bill 139 on Monday to implement the “bell to bell” ban for the 2025-26 school year. The restriction becomes optional for districts in the 2026-27 school year and thereafter.

    While the yearlong ban is in place, each district’s school board must adopt a policy restricting students from using cellphones, laptops, tablets, smart watches, smart headphones and smart glasses from the first bell ringing in the instructional day until final dismissal. The policy must outline disciplinary procedures for enforcing the rule.

    School-issued or school-approved devices used for classroom instruction are still allowed under the law. Districts could permit cellphone use for emergencies and for students who need it to monitor a health issue.

    Stitt previously urged public schools to find cost-neutral ways to make classrooms cellphone free to reverse a “worrying trend” of distraction, bullying and learning difficulties.

    “We’re seeing classrooms across the country struggle with the influx of cellphone use by students,” Stitt said in a statement Tuesday. “That’s why I issued my cellphone free school challenge in the fall. We want kids to be focused and present while they’re with their teachers, and this legislation helps promote an environment conducive to learning.”

    Before the 2025 legislative session began, state lawmakers met with mental health researchers who warned about the negative effect and addictive impact of digital media on youth. They also spoke with Oklahoma educators who said their schools saw better student behavior after banning cellphones.

    Meanwhile, Stitt visited schools that already have these restrictions in place, where students and educators spoke favorably about their school rules.

    Among the nation’s largest teachers union, 90% of members said they support cellphone restrictions during class time, and 83% favored prohibiting cellphone and personal device usage for the entire school day, according to a National Education Association survey.

    U.S. adults reported broad support for classroom cellphone restrictions in middle and high schools, but only a third of American adults said they support extending these bans for the whole school day, the Pew Research Center found.

    Support for SB 139 wasn’t overwhelming among Oklahoma lawmakers, either. The state Senate passed the bill with a 30-15 vote, and the House approved it 51-39.

    The House also passed a similar school cellphone ban, House Bill 1276, that would allow districts to opt out of the policy. SB 139 allows no such option until after a year.

    “This will allow teachers to focus entirely on educating our kids while students can concentrate on learning as much as possible,” an author of both bills, Sen. Ally Seifried, R-Claremore, said. “After two years of hard work on this issue, I’m thrilled to see this legislation become law, and I’m confident students, parents and teachers will see immediate benefits once the new school year begins.”

    HB 1276 is unlikely to advance in the Senate now that SB 139 has the governor’s signature, Seifried said.

    The bill’s House author, Rep. Chad Caldwell, R-Enid, called the measure a “try it before you buy it type of policy.”

    “I appreciate Gov. Stitt signing SB 139 to remove the distractions of cellphones from our schools and give our kids their childhood back,” Caldwell said Tuesday.

    The governor on Monday also signed into law a restriction on virtual school days. Senate Bill 758 will limit districts to using a maximum of two online instruction days per school year.

    “Kids learn best in the classroom,” said Sen. Kristen Thompson, R-Edmond, who wrote the bill. “Virtual days have their place in emergencies, but we’ve seen them become a go-to solution in some districts — and that’s not fair to students or families. This bill strikes the right balance by preserving flexibility without compromising the quality of education.”

    Oklahoma Voice is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Oklahoma Voice maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Janelle Stecklein for questions: info@oklahomavoice.com.


    Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter

    Source link

  • University of Florida Signs Agreement With ICE

    University of Florida Signs Agreement With ICE

    The University of Florida has signed an agreement to partner with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to help crack down on undocumented students, according to The Independent Florida Alligator, a student publication.

    The Florida Phoenix confirmed the report with a UF spokesperson, who said the university had agreed to deputize campus police as immigration officers but did not provide more details.

    The news broke the day after UF students held a rally on campus to protest the arrest and self-deportation of a Colombian student whom ICE agents stopped in late March for driving with an expired registration.

    UF is not the first institution in the state to commit to working with ICE; Florida Atlantic University signed a similar agreement earlier this month.

    Source link

  • Trump signs executive order that aims to close U.S. Department of Education

    Trump signs executive order that aims to close U.S. Department of Education

    This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at ckbe.at/newsletters.

    President Donald Trump has signed a much anticipated executive order that he said is designed to close the U.S. Department of Education.

    The order Trump signed Thursday tells Education Secretary Linda McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return authority over education to the States and local communities” to the “maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law.” At the same time, the order says McMahon should ensure “the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs, and benefits on which Americans rely.”

    Despite polling to the contrary, Trump said in his speech Thursday that closing the department is a popular idea that would save money and help American students catch up to other countries. He also said his order would ensure that other federal agencies take over major programs now housed at the Education Department, like those for students from low-income backgrounds and students with disabilities.

    “Beyond these core necessities, my administration will take all lawful steps to shut down the department,” Trump said. “We’re going to shut it down, and shut it down as quickly as possible. It’s doing us no good. We want to return our students to the states.”

    The executive order represents a symbolic achievement for Trump, who for years has expressed a desire to close the department. Yet the president has already radically transformed the department without relying on such an order. McMahon announced massive layoffs and buyouts earlier this month that cut the department’s staff nearly in half.

    Beyond the rhetoric, it’s unclear how exactly the order will impact the department’s work or existence.

    By law, only Congress can eliminate a cabinet-level agency authorized by Congress; White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt seemed to acknowledge as much Thursday before Trump signed the order, when she said that the Education Department will become “much smaller.” And during his Thursday remarks, Trump expressed hopes that Democrats as well as Republicans would be “voting” for the department’s closure, although prominent Democratic lawmakers have blasted the idea.

    The order does not directly change the department’s annual budget from Congress. And federal law dictates many of the Education Department’s main functions–changing those would require congressional approval that could be very hard to secure.

    Still, Trump’s move to dramatically slash the department’s staff could impact its capacity and productivity, even if officially its functions remain in place.

    At her confirmation hearing, McMahon promised to work with Congress on a reorganization plan. Project 2025, a prominent blueprint for conservative governance from the Heritage Foundation released before Trump’s second term, says that along with closing the Education Department, the federal government should move the department’s education civil rights enforcement to the Department of Justice, while the collection of education data should move to the U.S. Census Bureau.

    In a statement on Thursday, McMahon said closing the Education Department does not mean cutting off funds from those who depend on them.

    “We will continue to support K-12 students, students with special needs, college student borrowers, and others who rely on essential programs,” she wrote. “We’re going to follow the law and eliminate the bureaucracy responsibly by working with Congress and state leaders to ensure a lawful and orderly transition.”

    The executive order could be challenged in court. Many of Trump’s efforts to remake the federal bureaucracy are already tied up in litigation, including the Education Department layoffs.

    The executive order notes that the Education Department does not educate any students, and points to low test scores on an important national assessment as evidence that federal spending is not helping students.

    “Closing the Department of Education would provide children and their families the opportunity to escape a system that is failing them,” the order says.

    Trump order is triumph for department’s foes

    The Republican governors of Florida, Texas, Iowa, Indiana, Ohio, Louisiana, Tennessee, Idaho, and Nebraska were present during the signing ceremony. Trump said they “badly” wanted the federal government to give their states more control over education.

    “Probably the cost will be half, and the education will be maybe many, many times better,” Trump said. States that “run very, very well,” he said, could have education systems as good as those in Finland, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway–countries that tend to outperform the United States on international reading and math tests.

    The Education Department administers billions of dollars in federal assistance through programs such as Title I, which benefits high-poverty schools, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, which offsets the cost of special education services.

    The department also administers financial aid for college students, shares information about best practices with states and school districts, and enforces civil rights laws. And it oversees the school accountability system, which identifies persistently low-performing schools to extra support.

    States and school districts already make most education decisions, from teacher pay to curriculum choices.

    Conservatives have wanted to get rid of the U.S. Department of Education since it was created by President Jimmy Carter and Congress in 1979, and Trump talked about doing so in his first administration. But those efforts never gained traction.

    Conservatives say that for decades the department has failed to adequately address low academic performance. They also see the department as generally hostile to their political and ideological perspectives.

    The executive order says that McMahon must ensure that “any program or activity receiving Federal assistance terminate illegal discrimination obscured under the label ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ or similar terms and programs promoting gender ideology,” a reference to policies intended to make schools more welcoming for students of color and LGBTQ students.

    The department has moved to publicly target and root out diversity-focused practices in schools in recent weeks. And the department has already threatened to withhold federal funding from Maine for allowing trans athletes to compete on teams that match their gender identity.

    Public education advocates say critical expertise will be lost and students’ civil rights won’t be protected if Trump further diminishes the department. They also fear that a department overhaul could endanger billions in federal funding that bolsters state and local education budgets.

    They say they’re already seeing impacts from layoffs, which hit the Office for Civil Rights, Federal Student Aid, and the Institute of Education Sciences particularly hard.

    Even before McMahon took office, the U.S. DOGE Service, the cost-cutting initiative run by billionaire Elon Musk, canceled hundreds of millions of dollars worth of research grants and contracts.

    The Education Department already was one of the smallest cabinet-level departments, with around 4,100 employees, before the layoffs. With buyouts and layoffs, the department now employs just under 2,200 people.

    Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

    Related:
    The ED is dead! Long Live the ED!
    Linda McMahon is confirmed as education secretary–DOGE and a department overhaul await her

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Trump Signs Executive Order Directing Closure of the Department of Education

    Trump Signs Executive Order Directing Closure of the Department of Education

    by CUPA-HR | March 20, 2025

    On March 20, President Trump signed an executive order titled “Improving Education Outcomes by Empowering Parents, States, and Communities.” The order directs the secretary of education to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return authority over education to the States and local communities while ensuring the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs, and benefits on which Americans rely.”

    The order additionally states that the secretary of education “shall ensure that the allocation of any Federal Department of Education funds is subject to rigorous compliance with Federal law and Administration policy.” According to the order, this includes compliance with federal requirements to terminate “illegal discrimination obscured under the label ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’” and to terminate programs that promote gender ideology.

    With respect to higher education, the executive order asserts that closure of the ED “would drastically improve program implementation.” It specifically discusses ED’s role in managing the federal student loan debt portfolio, and it claims that ED “is not a bank, and it must return bank functions to an entity equipped to serve America’s students.”

    It is still unknown how Secretary McMahon will execute this order. Despite Trump’s clear intentions to close ED, Congress would still need to pass legislation to officially dissolve the department. It remains to be seen whether McMahon and the Trump administration will move ED’s subagencies and their functions to other federal agencies as speculated.

    More information is needed from ED to understand how this order will be implemented. CUPA-HR will continue to monitor for additional news and guidance from ED as it relates to the order.



    Source link

  • Trump signs order closing Education Department to ‘maximum extent appropriate’

    Trump signs order closing Education Department to ‘maximum extent appropriate’

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    President Donald Trump on Thursday afternoon ordered U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon to “take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education,” marking the boldest push from the president to shut down the agency since its establishment under the Carter administration over four decades ago. 

    Trump also said prior to the signing that he intends to disperse the department’s core functions — such as Pell Grants, Title I funding, and providing funding and resources for students with disabilities — to other parts of the government. 

    “They’re going to be preserved in full and redistributed to various other agencies and departments that will take very good care of them,” he said. “My administration will take all lawful steps to shut down the department. We’re going to shut it down and shut it down as quickly as possible.” 

    “It’s doing us no good,” he added. 

    The directive was originally expected to be released earlier this month. It comes less than two weeks after the Trump administration, under Education Secretary Linda McMahon’s leadership, abruptly cut the department’s workforce by half, shuttered over half of its civil rights enforcement offices, and fired all but a handful of National Center for Education Statistics employees. 

    The layoffs preceding the Thursday order impacted nearly 1,300 workers in addition to the nearly 600 employees who accepted “buyouts.”

    Trump has repeatedly and forcefully threatened to shut down the department since his first term in the White House, citing what he has called the agency’s “bloated budget” and a need to return education control to the states. His push to dismantle the department is in line with the 2024 Republican agenda, which included closing the department to “let the States run our educational system as it should be run.”

    In a Thursday speech, just prior to signing the order, Trump also cited low student test scores as reason to close the department. 

    “After 45 years, the United States spends more money in education by far than any other country, and spends, likewise, by far, more money per pupil than any country,” he said. “But yet we rank near the bottom of the list in terms of success. That’s where we are — like it or not — and we’ve been there for a long time.”

    Abolishing the 45-year-old agency altogether, however, requires a Senate supermajority of 60 votes. A similar proposal from conservatives in the House failed in 2023 when 60 House Republicans joined Democrats to defeat the measure.

    Given the current closely divided Congress, many have considered it a longshot that lawmakers would approve the department’s demise.  

    However, in his Thursday speech, Trump said he hopes Democrats would be onboard if the legislation to officially close the department eventually comes before Congressional lawmakers.

    What will be impacted?

    Although the administration technically needs Congressional action to close the department, the Thursday order tells McMahon to push its closures “to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law.”

    The agency is responsible for a slew of programs key to school and college operations, including conducting federal civil rights investigations, overseeing federal student financial aid, and enforcing regulations on Title IX and other education laws. It is in charge of large programs that schools depend on, like Title I, which sends aid to low-income school districts, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act that supports special education services.   

    Following the layoffs earlier this month, the department claimed its key functions, including overseeing COVID-19 pandemic relief, wouldn’t be impacted. 

    “Closing the Department does not mean cutting off funds from those who depend on them — we will continue to support K-12 students, students with special needs, college student borrowers, and others who rely on essential programs,” said McMahon in a statement praising the executive order on Thursday.

    Source link

  • This town fought residents over political yard signs — now it’s paying the price

    This town fought residents over political yard signs — now it’s paying the price

    Imagine putting a political sign in your yard, only to have your town threaten to fine you $1,000 a day for not following arbitrary size and placement rules.

    That’s exactly what happened to four residents of Lodi, New Jersey. But with the help of FIRE Legal Network attorney Randall Peach and his colleagues at the law firm Woolson Anderson Peach, they fought back — suing Lodi for violating their First Amendment rights.

    Like many places, Lodi regulates yard signs on private property, but its rules blatantly violate the First Amendment by singling out “political” signs — regulating how tall, wide, and close to the property line such signs can be, as well as whether they are up during the “correct” time of year.

    Making matters worse, three violations could land you in jail. Meanwhile, your neighbor could have an even bigger sign, right next to the property line, and never take it down — so long as it’s not “political.”

    The First Amendment protects your right to speak, especially on your own property. 

    That is unconstitutional, end of story.  The Supreme Court made that crystal clear in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, ruling that when sign regulations are based on what the sign says, the government must prove it has a compelling interest and use the least restrictive means to advance it. Lodi’s rules fail that test.

    Local governments often try to justify such restrictions with vague claims about aesthetics or traffic safety — but courts have never considered those interests compelling. And even if they were, it would be nonsensical to claim those concerns are advanced by restricting only “political” signs.

    Worse yet, the residents claimed in their lawsuit that Lodi initially only cracked down on signs supporting certain candidates. It was not until the four residents documented over 50 violations that local officials started applying the (still unconstitutional) rule more consistently. But even then, officials only issued eight summonses — after the election — and they were aimed at campaigns rather than other residents.

    Because of the lawsuit, Lodi settled for $75,000 and agreed to stop enforcing the restrictions on “political” signs. Lodi is also revising the ordinance to remove its discrimination against “political” content. But as FIRE has warned various towns before, even content-neutral restrictions, such as capping the number of signs residents can display or when they can do so, can violate basic constitutional rights.

    Here’s the bottom line. The First Amendment protects your right to speak, especially on your own property. As such, the government can’t come in and silence you just because it doesn’t like what you’re saying. And it certainly can’t do so for totally arbitrary reasons.

    FIRE defends the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought — no matter their views. FIRE’s proven approach to advocacy has vindicated the rights of thousands of Americans through targeted media campaigns, correspondence with officials, open records requests, litigation, and other advocacy tactics. If you think your rights have been violated, submit your case to FIRE today. 

    Source link

  • Trump Signs Executive Order to Ban Transgender Student-Athletes from Participation in Women’s Sports

    Trump Signs Executive Order to Ban Transgender Student-Athletes from Participation in Women’s Sports

    by CUPA-HR | February 11, 2025

    On February 5, President Trump signed an executive order titled “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports.” The order aims to bar transgender women and girls from participating in women’s sports by directing agencies to withdraw federal funding from schools that refuse to comply with the order.

    The EO claims that, in recent years, educational institutions and athletic associations have allowed men to compete in women’s sports, which the Trump administration believes denies women and girls equal opportunity to participate in competitive sports, thus violating Title IX. As a result, the EO sets policy to “rescind all funds from educational programs that deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities” and to “oppose male competitive participation in women’s sports more broadly.”

    With respect to the specific actions ordered, the EO directs the secretary of education to ensure compliance with the court order to vacate the Biden administration’s Title IX rule and to take other actions to ensure that the 2024 regulations do not have effect. It also directs the secretary to take action to “protect all-female athletic opportunities” by setting forth regulations and policy guidance that clearly specifies and clarifies “that women’s sports are reserved for women.”

    Notably, the EO further directs all federal agencies to review grants to educational programs and to rescind funding to programs that fail to comply with policy set forth in the EO. Institutions with grant programs deemed to be noncompliant with this order could, therefore, risk losing federal funding for that program.

    The EO also seeks quick enforcement by federal agencies. The EO orders the Department of Education to prioritize Title IX enforcement actions against educational institutions and athletic associations that “deny female students an equal opportunity to participate in sports and athletic events.” The Department of Justice is also tasked with providing resources to relevant agencies to ensure “expeditious enforcement” of the policy set forth in the EO.

    Finally, the EO directs the assistant to the president for domestic policy to convene both major athletic organizations and state attorneys general to promote policies consistent with Title IX and identify best practices in enforcing equal opportunities for women to participate in sports.

    On February 6, the NCAA updated its policy regarding transgender student-athlete participation in response to the EO. According to the NCAA, the new policy limits competition in women’s sports to student-athletes assigned female at birth, but it allows student-athletes assigned male at birth to practice with women’s teams and receive benefits while practicing with them. For men’s sports, student-athletes may participate in practice and competition regardless of their sex assigned at birth or their gender identity, assuming all other eligibility requirements are met.

    Institutions should review their policies and practices in light of the EO and the NCAA’s policy change. CUPA-HR will continue to monitor for Title IX updates and keep members apprised of new enforcement under the Trump administration.



    Source link

  • Trump signs order banning trans athletes in women’s sports

    Trump signs order banning trans athletes in women’s sports

    President Donald Trump signed an executive order Wednesday banning transgender women from participating in women’s sports.

    “The war on women’s sports is over,” he said. “With my action this afternoon, we are putting every school receiving taxpayer dollars on notice that if you let men take over women’s sports teams or invade your locker rooms, you will be investigated for violations of Title IX and risk your federal funding.”

    The executive order, signed on National Girls and Women in Sports Day, declares that it’s “the policy of the United States to oppose male competitive participation in women’s sports more broadly, as a matter of safety, fairness, dignity, and truth.” Under the order, the assistant to the president for domestic policy will bring together representatives of “major athletic organizations and governing bodies, and female athletes harmed by such policies, to promote policies that are fair and safe, in the best interests of female athletes.”

    The president’s latest action builds on the GOP’s broader campaign to remove all recognition of transgender individuals from state and federal programs. On his first day in office, Trump signed a separate executive action declaring that there are only two sexes and banning federal funding for any program related to “gender ideology.” And House Republicans have passed a bill that would unilaterally ban trans women from competing in women’s sports. In nearly half of the country, trans women are banned from playing women’s sports at the K-12 or higher education level, but the order would take those bans nationwide.

    Additionally, the order calls on the education secretary to prioritize “Title IX enforcement actions against educational institutions (including athletic associations composed of or governed by such institutions) that deny female students an equal opportunity to participate in sports and athletic events by requiring them, in the women’s category, to compete with or against or to appear unclothed before males.” (Federally funded K-12 public schools and colleges are required to comply with Title IX, which bars discrimination based on sex in educational settings.)

    Charlie Baker, president of the National Collegiate Athletic Association, told Congress recently that out of the more than 500,000 college athletes, fewer than 10 were transgender. The NCAA released a statement Wednesday that said, “The NCAA Board of Governors is reviewing the executive order and will take necessary steps to align NCAA policy in the coming days, subject to further guidance from the administration.”

    As Trump spoke Wednesday, girls and women—including former University of Kentucky swimmer and anti-trans advocate Riley Gaines—stood behind him, often clapping in support.

    After thanking them, the president turned back to face the rest of the East Room audience. He acknowledged the federal lawmakers, state attorneys general and governors in attendance, describing them as “friends of women’s sports.”

    “My administration will not stand by and watch men beat and batter women,” he said. “It’s going to end and nobody’s gonna be able to do a damn thing about it because when I speak [I] speak with authority.” (Trump was referring to an Olympic gold medal–winning Algerian boxer whom some accused of being transgender; the boxer has publicly said she was born a woman.)

    Fatima Goss Graves, president of the National Women’s Law Center, said in a statement that trans students do not pose a threat in sports and deserve the same opportunities as their peers.

    “The far-right’s disturbing obsession with controlling the bodies, hearts, and minds of our country’s youth harms all students,” Graves said.

    Education secretary nominee Linda McMahon attended the ceremony, though her confirmation hearing for the office has yet to be scheduled. In the meantime, the department is being led by a collection of acting officials and appointees, including Deputy General Counsel Candice Jackson, who described the president’s order as “a demonstration of common sense.”

    “The President affirmed that this administration will protect female athletes from the danger of competing against and the indignity of sharing private spaces with someone of the opposite sex,” Jackson said in a news release. “The Department of Education stands proudly with President Trump’s action as we prioritize Title IX enforcement against educational institutions that refuse to give female athletes the Title IX protections they deserve.”

    Other Republican lawmakers praised the order Wednesday, arguing it would ensure women and girls won’t be pushed to the sidelines.

    But Representative Bobby Scott, a Democrat from Virginia and ranking member on the House education committee, was quick to oppose the order, calling it “yet another overreach by this administration” and saying its lack of clarity will further complicate what should be addressed by sports associations.

    “Rather than address the real, urgent issues that students and families are facing every day, this administration continues to target vulnerable students—specifically transgender girls and women—with a shameless attempt to bully them,” he said in a statement. “They are willing to use the most vulnerable Americans as pawns in a political game.”

    Source link

  • Trump Signs Executive Order on Combating Antisemitism on Campus

    Trump Signs Executive Order on Combating Antisemitism on Campus

    by CUPA-HR | February 5, 2025

    On January 29, President Trump signed an executive order titled “Additional Measures to Combat Anti-Semitism.” The order directs certain federal agencies to use appropriate legal tools to “prosecute, remove, or otherwise hold to account the perpetrators of unlawful anti-Semitic harassment and violence.”

    Background

    The new EO directly connects to and expands upon Trump’s EO 13899, “Combating Anti-Semitism,” that was signed in December 2019. The 2019 EO tasks federal departments and agencies charged with enforcing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act to use the law to investigate potential cases of discrimination against Jewish individuals where such action does not run contrary to rights protected under other federal laws.

    The Biden administration did not rescind EO 13899, and they pursued regulations at the Department of Education to amend Title VI for cases involving discrimination based on shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics. The proposed rule, which was not published during the Biden administration but was most recently included in the Fall 2024 Regulatory Agenda, indicated that the regulations were in part in response to EO 13899.

    2025 Executive Order

    The new EO states that it reaffirms EO 13899 and “directs additional measures to advance the policy thereof in the wake of the Hamas terrorist attacks of October 7, 2023.” It takes direct aim at institutions of higher education, stating that the attacks resulted in “an unprecedented wave of vile anti-Semitic discrimination, vandalism, and violence … especially in our schools and on our campuses.”

    In response to these claims, the EO directs all federal agencies to submit a report within 60 days of the order that identifies “all civil and criminal authorities or actions within the jurisdiction of that agency, beyond those already implemented under Executive Order 13899, that might be used to curb or combat anti-Semitism.” Notably, the order directs these agency reports to include “an inventory and analysis of all pending administrative complaints … against or involving institutions of higher education alleging civil rights violations related to or arising from post-October 7, 2023, campus anti-Semitism.”

    The EO provides additional requirements for the reports submitted by the U.S. attorney general and the secretary of education. Specifically, the order directs the attorney general’s report to include “an inventory and analysis of all court cases against or involving institutions of higher education alleging civil rights violations related to or arising from” antisemitism that potentially occurred after the October 2023 attacks. The attorney general is also required to indicate whether they intend to or have taken any action with respect to the cases at institutions of higher education. Moreover, the secretary of education is tasked with submitting additional inventory and analysis of Title VI complaints related to antisemitism that were filed to the Office for Civil Rights after the October 7 attacks.

    Finally, the EO directs the secretaries of state, education and homeland security to report recommendations to familiarize “institutions of higher education with the grounds for inadmissibility under 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3) so that such institutions may monitor for and report activities by alien students and staff relevant to those grounds” and to ensure “that such reports about aliens lead, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to investigations and, if warranted, actions to remove such aliens.”

    Next Steps

    As explained above, the EO directs agencies to promulgate reports for the president within the next 60 days. Additional information and guidance are needed from relevant agencies to determine next steps for institutions of higher education. CUPA-HR will keep members apprised of additional updates related to Title VI enforcement and public policy related to antisemitism on campus.



    Source link

  • Trump Signs Executive Order on Enforcement of Immigration Laws, Potentially Leading to Increased Worksite Enforcement Action

    Trump Signs Executive Order on Enforcement of Immigration Laws, Potentially Leading to Increased Worksite Enforcement Action

    by CUPA-HR | January 29, 2025

    Along with several immigration-related executive orders and actions issued on Inauguration Day, President Trump signed an executive order titled “Protecting the American People Against Invasion.” The EO sets several directives for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to enforce immigration law against immigrants without permanent legal status in the U.S. and could implicate employers the government deems as “facilitating” the presence of such individuals.

    Sections 4 and 5 of the EO establish civil and criminal enforcement priorities for relevant federal agencies. Specifically, the EO directs the secretary of Homeland Security to enable ICE and USCIS to set priorities for their agencies that would ensure successful enforcement of final orders of removal. Additionally, Section 8 of the EO directs increased enforcement action in the form of civil fines and penalties. The EO directs the secretary of Homeland Security to ensure assessment and collection of all fines and penalties from individuals unlawfully present in the U.S. and, notably, those who facilitate such individuals’ presence in the U.S.

    Depending on how the agencies respond to this order, these three sections of the EO could lead to an uptick in worksite enforcement action. As a result of this EO, agencies could take increased enforcement action for employment-related immigration law, which could lead to agency actions such as Form I-9 audits and potential investigations and worksite visits related to immigration compliance. Employers who are not in compliance with federal immigration laws could be considered as entities that potentially “facilitate” the presence of immigrants without permanent legal status, which could lead to significant fines and other penalties for the employers.

    Next Steps for HR Leaders

    CUPA-HR has always worked to help you ensure that your institution’s Form I-9 processes are in compliance with federal requirements, and we’ve partnered with USCIS for many years to provide periodic guidance, support and resources. We also understand that it is sometimes a challenge to ensure total compliance for large, sprawling campuses and that some of you have employees at worksites across your state, the country and the globe. Through speeches and actions like this executive order, the Trump administration has made it clear that they intend to focus enforcement efforts on immigrants without permanent legal status and businesses employing them. As noted above, it is possible that there could be I-9 audits and site visits to ensure compliance. Penalties for noncompliance could include very large fines and loss of federal funding.

    In light of this EO, it is vital for institutions to review their compliance with immigration laws regarding employment eligibility and work authorization. There are several questions HR leaders should ask themselves when reviewing compliance:

    • If you were notified tomorrow that your institution’s Form I-9 records were going to be audited in the coming weeks, where would your institution be most vulnerable?
    • What actions do you need to take today to address any potential vulnerabilities?
    • Do your presidents, provosts and other campus leaders understand and appreciate the magnitude of this potential challenge?
    • What changes do you need to make to your institution’s hiring and onboarding practices now to ensure compliance moving forward?

    CUPA-HR will continue to monitor for any additional updates related to the Form I-9 and other hiring processes related to work authorization. If you need additional guidance or resources, please review the CUPA-HR I-9/E-Verify Toolkit.



    Source link