This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.
Funding cuts. Raids near campuses. Exclusion from programs like Head Start and career training. For months, the Trump administration has been chipping away at the rights of students without legal status in public schools.
Could the administration take away those students’ right to free public school entirely? Experts say that may be the next step.
“People have worried about this for a couple decades, but this is different,” said Patricia Gándara, education professor and co-director of the Civil Rights Project at UCLA. “Right now we have to be extremely vigilant. These people will stop at nothing.”
A 1982 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Plyler v. Doe, guarantees all students, regardless of immigration status, the right to a free public education in K-12 schools. But last year the conservative Heritage Foundation called for the Supreme Court to overturn the ruling and for states to charge tuition to immigrant families, even if their children are U.S. citizens. The rationale is that schools spend billions of dollars educating those students — money that instead should be spent on students who, along with their parents, are native-born U.S. citizens.
Project 2025, also published by the Heritage Foundation, echoes that vision.
Such a policy would have an outsized impact in California, where nearly half of the state’s children have at least one immigrant parent, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.
“This would have tremendous negative impacts,” said Megan Hopkins, chair of the education department at UC San Diego. “For starters, we’d have a less educated, less literate populace, which would affect the economy and nearly every other aspect of life in California.”
Tuition for noncitizens
Plyler v. Doe stemmed from a case in Texas in the early 1980s. The state had passed a law allowing schools to charge tuition to students who weren’t citizens. The Tyler Independent School District in Tyler, Texas, a small city about 100 miles southeast of Dallas, was among the districts that tried, triggering a lawsuit that eventually brought the case to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, arguing that children who aren’t citizens are entitled to equal protection under the law. Still, the ruling was close — 5 to 4 — even though the court was more liberal than it is today.
Since then, the ruling has been mostly forgotten. But there have been occasional attempts to restrict immigrants in schools, in California and elsewhere. In 1994 California voters passed Proposition 187, which banned immigrants living illegally in the U.S. from receiving public benefits, including access to public schools. A federal court blocked it before it went into effect.
In 2011, Alabama passed a law requiring schools to collect students’ immigration status. That law was later blocked by a federal court. In 2022, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said he’d favor revisiting Plyler v. Doe and that states should not have to pay to educate students without legal status.
Since the Heritage Foundation published its report, about a half-dozen states have attempted to pass laws that would allow schools to charge tuition to noncitizens. None passed last year, but advocates said they plan to keep trying.
Route to Supreme Court
They’re likely to have a sympathetic supporter in President Donald Trump, who’s so far followed many of the policies put forward by Project 2025. In the past few months, his administration has amped up immigration arrests and said it would no longer honor schools as safe havens from enforcement. It also cut (although later reinstated after states sued) funding for migrant students and barred students without legal status from Head Start, adult education and career and technical education.
The issue could land before the Supreme Court in at least two ways. A state could pass a law allowing public schools to charge tuition, leading to a lawsuit which could end up before the Supreme Court. Or Trump could issue an executive order that could also trigger a lawsuit.
Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley Law School, said some of Trump’s actions, such as barring children without legal status from Head Start, is already a violation of Plyler.
“There’s no doubt that the Trump administration has increased pressure on Plyler,” Chemerinsky said. “Certainly, what Trump is doing could lead to cases that would get to the Supreme Court. Could this court overturn Plyler? Of course they could. … all it would take is five justices wanting to overrule it.”
Even if it’s not overturned, the current policy shifts have had a chilling effect on schools and immigrant families, said Hopkins, at UC San Diego. School attendance has dropped in communities experiencing immigration crackdowns, which has caused academic repercussions for some students and widened the achievement gap between Latino students and other groups. A recent report by Policy Analysis for California Education found that Latino students and English learners fared worse in math and English in the wake of immigration arrests in their communities, and reported a significant increase in bullying at school.
Hopkins also said the policies aren’t especially effective. If the goal is to encourage immigrants to return to their home countries voluntarily, research has shown that doesn’t often happen. After Alabama passed its anti-immigrant law in 2011, many families simply moved to Mississippi.
‘Our biggest fear’
In Monterey County, the new policies have led to widespread fear and confusion among immigrant families, said Monterey County Office of Education Superintendent Deneen Guss. Attendance has dropped not only in schools, but at community events as well.
To support families, schools have been hosting “Know Your Rights” information nights (in-person and virtually), encouraged parents to submit child care plans to schools in case a parent is arrested, given out booklets in Spanish on how to help children experiencing anxiety, and provided a wide array of legal and other resources.
But when the Trump administration announced it was barring students without legal status from Head Start, “that gave me pause,” Guss said. “That made me think they really were going after Plyler. That’s our biggest fear.”
She worries about the impact that would have on families, as well as school staff who would suddenly be responsible for checking students’ citizenship paperwork. Currently, schools don’t ask for students’ immigration status.
“Educators’ jobs are hard enough,” Guss said. “Our job is to give children the best possible education. Don’t make us become immigration officers. It’s a position we do not want.”
She’s been urging parents, and the public, to stay informed and speak out. Regardless of whether the Supreme Court overturns Plyler, anti-immigrant policies are almost certain to continue, with devastating consequences for students.
“You can’t sit back and pretend everything is going to be OK,” Guss said. “People need to ensure their voices are heard. And we have to fight for our kids.”
The legal challenge takes aim at Rubio’s use of statutes to deport legal noncitizens, namely international students Mahmoud Khalil and Rümeysa Öztürk, for their speech alone. It was filed by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) on August 6.
“In the United States of America, no one should fear a midnight knock on the door for voicing the wrong opinion,” said FIRE attorney Conor Fitzpatrick: “Free speech isn’t a privilege the government hands out. Under our constitution it is the inalienable right of every man, woman and child.”
FIRE, a non-partisan advocacy group, is seeking a landmark ruling that the first amendment trumps the statutes that the government used to deport international students and other lawfully present noncitizens for protected speech earlier this year.
It cites the case of Mahmoud Khalil, an international student targeted by the Trump administration for his pro-Palestinian activism, who was held in detention for three months after being arrested by plain clothed immigration officers in a Columbia University building.
The complaint also highlights the targeting of Tufts University student Rümeysa Öztürk, detained on the street and held for nearly seven weeks for co-authoring an op-ed calling for Tufts to acknowledge Israel’s attacks on Palestine and divest from companies with ties to Israel.
FIRE has said that that Rubio and Trump’s targeting of international students is “casting a pall of fear over millions of noncitizens, who now worry that voicing the ‘wrong’ opinion about America or Israel will result in deportation”.
This spring, thousands of students saw their visas revoked by the administration, after a speech from Rubio warning them: “We give you a visa to come and study to get a degree, not to become a social activist that tears up our university campuses”.
Free speech isn’t a privilege the government hands out
Conor Fitzpatrick, FIRE
Though the students’ statuses have since been restored following a court hearing deeming the mass terminations to be illegal, some students opted to leave the US amid fears of being detained or deported.
This summer, international student interest in the US fell to its lowest level since mid-pandemic, with new estimates forecasting a potential 30-40% decline in new international enrolments this fall following the state department’s suspension of new visa interviews.
Plaintiffs in the lawsuit include The Stanford Daily – the independent, student newspaper at Stanford University – and two legal noncitizens with no criminal record who fear deportation and visa revocation for engaging in pro-Palestinian speech.
“There’s real fear on campus and it reaches into the newsroom,” said Greta Reich, editor-in-chief of The Stanford Daily.
“I’ve had reporters turn down assignments, request the removal of some of their articles, and even quit the paper because they fear deportation for being associated with speaking on political topics, even in a journalistic capacity.
“The Daily is losing the voices of a significant portion of our student population,” said Reich.
The complaint argues that Rubio’s wielding of two provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act is unconstitutional when used to revoke a visa or deport someone for the first amendment right of free speech.
“The first allows the secretary of state to render a noncitizen deportable if he ‘personally determines’ their lawful ‘beliefs, statements, or associations’ ‘compromise a compelling United States foreign policy interest’”, explains the document.
“The second allows the secretary ‘at any time, in his discretion, revoke’ a ‘visa or other documentation’”.
The complaint argues that both provisions are unconstitutional as applied to protected speech, based on the first amendment promise “that the government may not subject a speaker to disfavoured treatment because those in power do not like his or her message”.
In our free country, you shouldn’t have to show your papers to speak your mind
Will Creeley, FIRE
According to the claimants, Trump and Rubio’s targeting of international students is evidence of noncitizens not being afforded the same free speech protections as US nationals, which, they say, runs against America’s founding principles.
“Every person – whether they’re a US citizen, are visiting for the week, or are here on a student visa – has free speech rights in this country,” said FIRE.
“Two lawful residents of the United States holding the same sign at the same protest shouldn’t be treated differently just because one’s here on a visa,” said FIRE legal director Will Creeley.
“The First Amendment bars the government from punishing protected speech – period. In our free country, you shouldn’t have to show your papers to speak your mind.”
The lawsuit comes amid heightened scrutiny of international students in the US, with the state department ordering consular officers to ramp up social media screening procedures.
As of June 2025, US missions abroad will now vet students for instances of “advocacy for, aid, or support of foreign terrorists and other threats to US national security,” as well as any signs of “anti-Semitic harassment and violence” among applicants.
After decades of trying, conservatives this year succeeded in creating the first national school voucher program.
The Republican megabill that President Donald Trump signed into law in July will establish new tax credit scholarships for families to use at private schools, including religious ones — a long-held goal of school privatization advocates who argue parents should get taxpayer support if they want to opt out of their neighborhood school.
Under the “big, beautiful bill,” donors can receive dollar-for-dollar tax credits of up to $1,700 for contributions to scholarship-granting nonprofits. Those groups then distribute the money to families seeking help paying for private school, tutoring and other educational expenses.
The program, while significant, is less expansive than in earlier drafts of the legislation. Previous versions gave donors larger tax credits — a match up to $5,000 or 10 percent of their income, whichever is greater — and mandated that all states participate rather than allowing them to opt in.
Here are 10 things to know about the program. If you have other questions or there’s more you’d like to know, write to us: [email protected].
When does it start?
Jan. 1, 2027. Families have until then to research where they might want to spend a scholarship — and if the school in mind even plans to accept one. Taxpayers who want to contribute to support the scholarships can do so beginning in late 2026.
How will the scholarships work?
The law opens the door to churches, universities, education nonprofits, rotary clubs and potentially even public schools (more on that below) to accept and distribute donations for the program. These “scholarship-granting organizations,” or SGOs, can keep up to 10 percent of the donations for administrative costs.
In some states with existing scholarship programs, families apply with a third-party contractor that works with eligible schools and selects students for awards. Other states allow religious groups and other nonprofits to create and manage their own scholarship funds. The federal bill gives states wide flexibility to make those sorts of decisions about how the program is administered, experts say.
Who’s eligible for the scholarships?
To qualify, students need to check these boxes: They must be eligible to attend a public school, their state must opt in to the program, and their families must earn no more than three times the area median income — a threshold that would include households with incomes nearing $500,000 in some parts of the United States.
Students who already attend private school qualify, since they are eligible for public school, even if they don’t attend one. The scholarships also may cover home-schoolers. (Keep reading for more on that.)
How much money will families receive?
While the bill set a $1,700 cap on how much individual donors can contribute through their taxes, it’s unclear whether it limits how much an individual student could collect in scholarships.
In theory, a student could apply for several scholarships. An SGO might also offer a scholarship that reimburses a family for all costs associated with attending their preferred school. In states that already offer similar school choice programs, a student might be able to collect scholarships from both the new program and the existing state program. Still, the average cost of private school tuition is roughly $13,000, so even students who combine several scholarships may not receive enough to cover the full cost of attending.
The Treasury Department is expected to issue regulations on the program, and we may not know these kinds of details until it does.
Quite a lot. The legislation suggests that families could use the money not only to help pay for private school tuition, but also for room and board, services for students with disabilities, transportation, tutoring, and school supplies like books, computers and uniforms.
The rules may depend on the individual state and its definition of an “eligible school.” In some states, home schooling might qualify students for the scholarships, but in other states it might not, said Robert Enlow, president of EdChoice, a pro-school choice group.
It’s also possible that public schools could charge scholarship students — as some do with home-schoolers — for services like tutoring, special education or advanced courses.
So students can use the money at public schools? How would that work?
Yes, potentially. In some states, schools already charge activity or participation fees for non-enrolled students who want to join clubs and sports. Marguerite Roza, director of the Edunomics Lab at Georgetown University, said some states may write their own rules that allow schools to extend the menu of services they could charge for.
Meanwhile, most school districts — roughly 4 in 5 — already partner with foundations that raise money to help students with transportation, school supplies and basic needs. Both Enlow and Roza said they expected nonprofits and districts to partner on finding ways to tap the federal scholarship dollars as well.
“Imagine you could have a public school foundation going out and helping with transportation and books and computers and tutors and all sorts of stuff, right?” Enlow said. “The potential is huge.”
Will all private schools accept the scholarships?
No, private schools are not required to accept the scholarships, and many states that offer school choice don’t require private schools to participate. Private schools generally can accept or reject a student for any reason, whether they have a scholarship or not.
In Arizona, for example, the tax credit program provided scholarships to students at 348 schools last year. More than 400 private schools operated in the state as of 2022.
Roughly 21 states — including Arizona, Georgia and Montana — offer their own tax credit scholarships, according to the group EdChoice, so it’s expected they would opt into the federal program. Conservative lawmakers in North Carolina already introduced a bill to allow families there to take part in the federal scholarships.
If public schools can benefit too, even Democratic governors may consider joining the program, said Roza.
“Ultimately if the state can open this to summer camp and tutoring, obviously there would be a lot of pressure to unlock so much money with this,” she said.
How much will the scholarships cost the government?
It depends on how many taxpayers claim the credit.
While an earlier version of the bill would have capped the tax credits at $10 billion a year, the final legislation contains no such limit — so the exact amount in lost revenue won’t be known until much later. That said, an analysis by the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation found that the legislation would cost the Treasury up to $4 billion per year.
Others think the cost will be higher. The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a left-leaning research group, placed its projection closer to $51 billion, while Roza estimated the cost at $28 billion per year. Still, she hesitated to count that as a direct loss to K-12 funding. “It’s new money in the sense that it doesn’t go into or out of the federal pie,” Roza said.
What’s been the reaction to the plan?
Critics, including teachers unions and many education experts, have been quick to raise alarms about the voucher program, arguing that it’s a handout for wealthy families and will harm public schools by reducing funding for them.
“It’s the centerpiece of the Great American Heist — a privatization scheme wrapped in tax policy,” Denise Forte, president of the left-leaning nonprofit EdTrust, said at a hearing before the Senate Democratic Caucus in July.
Advocates for the separation of church and state worry about the program channeling money from government coffers to religious schools, while disability advocates note that private schools are not required to serve students with disabilities.
Some supporters of school vouchers, meanwhile, wish the legislation had gone further.
“This is a very positive program for taxpayers in America. You can help families get better education and claim a tax credit for it,” said EdChoice’s Enlow. “It’s going to benefit middle- and low-income families.” But he added, “It’s not as generous as we would like, which is universal.”
Others are focused now on encouraging states to participate in the program. “The fight doesn’t end with the passing of the bill,” said Sydney Altfield, national director of Teach Coalition, which advocates for Jewish schools to get access to government funding. “States must opt into the program.”
Contact staff writer Neal Morton at 212-678-8247, on Signal at nealmorton.99, or via email at [email protected].
The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.
This story about AmeriCorps jobs was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter.
Lily Tegner didn’t know what she wanted to do when she graduated from Oregon State University with a chemical engineering degree five years ago. She entered the workforce at a point when unemployment briefly skyrocketed and companies were freezing hiring because of the Covid pandemic. “I didn’t have a very clear direction as far as where I was going in life,” she said.
Like hundreds of thousands of other young adults, Tegner kick-started her career through AmeriCorps, a federal agency that sends its members to communities across the country to tutor students, help after disasters strike and restore wildlife habitats, among other activities. She took a position at the Alaska Afterschool Network, where her job was to help find ways to expand science, technology, engineering and math access in its programs. Four years later, she’s still there — now, as a full-time employee managing the nonprofit’s AmeriCorps program.
“This state became my home,” Tegner said, adding that her year in AmeriCorps “completely changed the trajectory of my career.”
An AmeriCorps member poses with a student in one of the Alaska Afterschool Network’s funded programs. The organization lost its AmeriCorps funding last spring. Credit: Courtesy of Alaska Afterschool Network
This spring, Alaska Afterschool Network was one of hundreds of organizations abruptly notified that its AmeriCorps funding had been terminated. Federal funding cuts forced the nonprofit to eliminate three full-time positions and cancel 19 internships scheduled for this summer. Tegner’s job is also at risk, though the organization is trying to find a way to keep her on.
In late April, the Trump administration slashed 41 percent of AmeriCorps’ funding, cutting about $400 million in grants and letting go of more than 32,000 members serving in hundreds of programs across the United States. In June and also this month, judges ordered the government to restore some funding, but the ruling does not reinstate all the money that was taken away. Shrinking AmeriCorps is among the many steps the Trump administration has taken to curb what he has called “waste, fraud and abuse” of federal funds. More action is expected in the months ahead.
Related: Become a lifelong learner. Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter featuring the most important stories in education.
Over the years, the program former President Bill Clinton created has deployed more than a million people.On top of gutting AmeriCorps, the cuts have diminished the reach of an agency that has been a critical path to a career for recent high school and college graduates at a time when entry-level jobs can be difficult to find.
AmeriCorps was created more than three decades ago to oversee expanded federal volunteer programs, incorporating existing projects including Volunteers in Service to America and the National Civilian Community Corps. Its members take on community service positions across the country that can last for up to two years. They receive a small living stipend, and full-time members are eligible for health insurance. At the end of their terms, members are awarded a grant that can be used to pay college tuition or student loans.
“AmeriCorps dollars have a powerful ripple effect, for both the AmeriCorps members and the students that they serve,” said Leslie Cornfeld, founder and CEO of the National Education Equity Lab, a nonprofit that brings college courses to high-poverty schools. “In many instances, it helps them define their careers.”
About half of the AmeriCorps funding for the Philadelphia Higher Education Network for Neighborhood Development was cut this spring. Credit: Courtesy of PHENND
Federal surveys of AmeriCorps members from 2019, 2021 and 2023 show that 90 percent of members joined the national program in part to gain skills that would help them in school and work, and well over 80 percent said their experience in AmeriCorps helped further their “professional goals and endeavors.”
The Trump administration cited fraud as part of its reason for nearly halving the AmeriCorps budget. Audits of the agency have raised questions about its financial management.
Peter Fleckenstein, 23, joined Aspire Afterschool in Arlington, Virginia, through AmeriCorps last year after graduating from the University of Delaware with a degree in psychology. He saw AmeriCorps as a way to build out his resume; even the entry-level positions he encountered during his job search required experience in the field.
In his position at the after-school program, Fleckenstein leads daily activities for a group of about two dozen fourth grade students. The experience has helped him crystallize his career aspirations: Before AmeriCorps, he was considering clinical social work or teaching. Now, he wants to become a counselor.
“Working with the kids here is a lot of behavior management: problem solving, helping them regulate themselves,” Fleckenstein said. “Doing one-on-one work with them, building habits and routines with them — that is something that I could focus on more if I was in a counseling job.”
Fleckenstein’s position was cut in April before he could complete his one-year term set to end in August, but Aspire Afterschool was able to raise money through donations to hire him and some of the nonprofit’s other AmeriCorps members part-time to finish out their grant year.
The Philadelphia Higher Education Network for Neighborhood Development lost half of its AmeriCorps funding this past spring when the federal agency was slashed. Credit: Courtesy of PHENND
While some members have joined Americorps after graduating, student Deja Johnson, 24, joined as a way to help pay for college. Her term at The Scholarship Academy — a nonprofit in Atlanta helping low-income high school students navigate financial aid applications — was supposed to end with a $7,400 education grant. Because the terms were cut short, members have been told they’ll get only a prorated portion of the money.
“It’s a little bit of a shame,” said Johnson, who is using the education grant to pursue a bachelor’s degree in nonprofit leadership.
“That’s what a lot of us look forward to with this work that we’re doing, because we know how much of a sacrifice it can be at times. It’s that ‘pouring into our community’ — and that’s how our community pours into us,” Johnson said.
The AmeriCorps termination letters told grantees that their programs no longer met agency priorities, but the nonprofits were not told what those priorities are. Programs with different missions, in both Democratic- and Republican-led communities, were cut.
Sira Coulibaly, a member with the Philadelphia Higher Education Network for Neighborhood Development’s Next Steps AmeriCorps program, packs bags of food for the Metropolitan Area Neighborhood Nutrition Alliance. Credit: Courtesy of PHENND
The Hindman Settlement School, a nonprofit in rural Kentucky, was one victim of the cuts. The organization receives about $1 million a year from AmeriCorps for its program tutoring students with math and reading learning disabilities in more than two dozen schools. Losing that funding means drastically scaling back services, said Josh Mullins, senior director of operations at the Hindman Settlement School. He said he does not know why Hindman’s grants were terminated: The nonprofit regularly passes its audits, and its last annual report showed an average gain of seven months in reading levels among students in its dyslexia intervention program.
A statement published in January on an AmeriCorps webpage says the agency is in the process of “conducting a full review” to comply with President Donald Trump’s executive order banning diversity, equity and inclusion in federal programs. But Mullins and other AmeriCorps grantees said diversity, equity and inclusion efforts were not listed anywhere as part of their operations.
“That’s what’s devastating,” Mullins said. “It was completely out of our control. There was nothing you could do.”
The administration also gutted 85 percent of the agency’s federal staff, which has caused problems even for programs that are still receiving AmeriCorps funding.
The federal government terminated about half of the AmeriCorps grants for the Philadelphia Higher Education Network for Neighborhood Development. The group uses the funding to place members in local nonprofits and to help develop community partnerships in high-poverty schools. Director Hillary Kane said she’s been experiencing delays from the national AmeriCorps office in getting members approved for the programs that are still operating.
“We need the humans in D.C. to do the stuff that they do, so we can do the stuff that we do,” Kane said. “The person we communicate with isn’t there.”
About half of the AmeriCorps funding for the Philadelphia Higher Education Network for Neighborhood Development was cut this spring. Credit: Courtesy of PHENND
On June 5, a federal judge granted a temporary injunction ordering the Trump administration to restore AmeriCorps funding in states that had sued over the budget cuts. The lawsuit, which was filed by two dozen Democratic-led states in May, challenges the administration’s authority to cancel the funding without Congressional approval. But the judge’s injunction does not require the Trump administration to reinstate AmeriCorps’ federal employees, and funding is not being restored to programs in states that did not sign on to the lawsuit, including Alaska, home of the Alaska Afterschool Network, or Virginia, where Aspire Afterschool is based.
The Hindman Settlement School in Kentucky was one organization whose funding was restored this summer because of the lawsuit. Mullins said he’s hopeful the nonprofit will continue to receive AmeriCorps funding for the upcoming grant cycle in the fall.
For Kane, the injunction does not undo the chaos caused by the abrupt cancellation of half of her Philadelphia organization’s funding. Many terminated members that were with Kane’s organization have already moved on.
Programs whose grants were cut can apply again in the next grant cycle, but the president’s 2026 budget calls for shutting down AmeriCorps entirely.
While the debate in Washington rages, current and former volunteers mourn the potential loss of a program they said gave their lives meaning and led to employment. The avenue AmeriCorps provided for Tegner to start a career at the Alaska Afterschool Network gave her purpose in life, she said. She’s worried if the program ends, there won’t be another pathway on the same scale for young idealists who aren’t sure what they want to do with their lives.
“It helps young people of all ages grow and try new things,” Tegner said. “That’s very much what it was for me.”
Contact staff writer Ariel Gilreath on Signal at arielgilreath.46 or at [email protected].
The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — La casa de Maggi, situada en un barrio residencial de esta ciudad, es un refugio para las familias locales. Es un lugar donde, tras solo unas semanas en el programa de cuidado infantil familiar de Maggi esta primavera, un niño en edad preescolar empezó a llamarla “mamá” y a su marido “papá”. Los niños que han terminado el programa de Maggi siguen rogando a sus padres que los lleven a su casa en lugar ir de al colegio.
En los últimos meses, cada vez son menos las familias que acuden a la guardería: se han intensificado las medidas de control de la inmigración y las políticas migratorias han cambiado rápidamente. Tanto Maggi como las familias que dependen de ella, algunas de las cuales son inmigrantes, ya no se sienten seguras.
“Hay mucho miedo en la comunidad latina, y todos ellos son buenas personas, gente buena y trabajadora”, dijo Maggi, de 47 años, en español a través de un intérprete una mañana reciente, mientras observaba a un recién nacido dormir en lo que solía ser su sala de estar. Desde que comenzó su propio negocio de cuidado infantil hace dos años, ha dedicado casi cada centímetro de su espacio común a crear un oasis colorido y lleno de juguetes para los niños. Maggi no entiende por qué tantos inmigrantes corren ahora el riesgo de ser deportados. “Llevamos aquí mucho tiempo”, dijo. “Hemos estado trabajando honestamente”.
Los inmigrantes como Maggi desempeñan un papel crucial en el cuidado infantil en el hogar, así como en el sistema de cuidado infantil más amplio de Estados Unidos, que cuenta con más de 2 millones de trabajadores, en su mayoría mujeres. (The Hechinger Report no utiliza el apellido de Maggi por motivos de seguridad, tanto para ella como para las familias que utilizan sus servicios). Es muy difícil encontrar y retener a los cuidadores, no solo porque el trabajo es duro, sino también por los salarios bajos y las prestaciones limitadas. A nivel nacional, los inmigrantes representan casi el 20 % de la mano de obra dedicada al cuidado infantil. En la ciudad de Nueva York, los inmigrantes representan más del 40 % de la mano de obra dedicada al cuidado infantil. En Los Ángeles, casi el 50 %.
Maggi juega con una de sus pupilas en el patio trasero de su guardería. Maggi dirige una de las pocas guarderías que ofrecen atención las 24 horas del día, los 7 días de la semana, en su ciudad. Credit: Jackie Mader/The Hechinger Report
La guerra de largo alcance de la administración Trump contra la inmigración, que incluye cuotas diarias para la detención de inmigrantes, nuevas restricciones a los permisos de trabajo y la detención de residentes legales, amenaza el ya frágil sistema de cuidado infantil de Estados Unidos. Los proveedores inmigrantes, especialmente aquellos que atienden a familias inmigrantes, se han visto especialmente afectados. Al igual que Maggi, los proveedores de cuidado infantil de todo el país están viendo cómo las familias desaparecen de su cuidado, lo que amenaza la viabilidad de esos negocios. En Estados Unidos, uno de cada cuatro niños menores de seis años tiene al menos un progenitor nacido en el extranjero. Algunos niños que podrían beneficiarse de cuidadores experimentados se encuentran ahora en casa con hermanos mayores o parientes ancianos, perdiéndose la socialización y la preparación para el jardín de infancia que los centros de cuidado proveen. Algunos trabajadores inmigrantes, independientemente de su situación, tienen demasiado miedo para ir a trabajar, lo que agrava la escasez de personal. Recientemente, la administración anunció que prohibiría el acceso de los niños indocumentados a Head Start, el programa de cuidado infantil financiado por el gobierno federal para niños de familias con bajos ingresos.
Relacionado: Los niños pequeños tienen necesidades únicas y proporcionarles los cuidados adecuados puede ser un reto. Nuestro boletín gratuitosobre educación infantil hace un seguimiento de estos temas.
“Las políticas antiinmigrantes pueden y van a debilitar toda nuestra infraestructura de cuidado infantil”, afirmó Karla Coleman-Castillo, analista política sénior del Centro Nacional de Derecho de la Mujer. Los programas domiciliarios, en particular, se verán afectados, ya que suelen atender a más familias inmigrantes. “Cualquier cosa que amenace la estabilidad de la capacidad y la comodidad de las familias para acceder a la educación infantil, y la comodidad de los educadores para incorporarse o permanecer en el mercado laboral, va a afectar a un sector ya de por sí precario”.
Para Maggi, las consecuencias no se han hecho esperar. En febrero, solo unas semanas después de que se anunciaran los primeros cambios, su matrícula pasó de 15 niños al día a siete. Algunas familias regresaron a México. Otras se pusieron tan nerviosas que no se atrevían a desviarse de sus rutas de trabajo ni siquiera para dejar a sus hijos rápidamente. Algunas ya no querían dar su información al estado para obtener ayuda para pagar la guardería.
En mayo, solo dos niños, un bebé y un niño de 4 años, estaban matriculados a tiempo completo, junto con seis niños que acudían a la guardería antes o después del colegio. Maggi acepta a niños que pagan de forma privada y a aquellos que pagan con subsidios de cuidado infantil a través del programa estatal para niños de bajos ingresos. Gana unos 2.000 dólares al mes por el bebé y el niño en edad preescolar, y unos doscientos más cada semana por el cuidado después de la escuela, lo que supone una reducción significativa con respecto a los 9.000 o 10.000 dólares de finales de 2024. Para los padres que no reciben subsidios estatales, mantiene sus tarifas bajas: menos de 7 dólares la hora. “Me dicen que soy barata”, dice Maggi con una leve sonrisa. Pero ella no está dispuesta a subir sus tarifas. “Yo era madre soltera”, dijo. “Recuerdo que me costaba mucho encontrar a alguien que cuidara de mis hijos cuando tenía que trabajar”.
Como muchos proveedores de cuidado infantil que emigraron a Estados Unidos siendo adultos, Maggi comenzó su carrera en un campo completamente diferente. Cuando era una joven madre, Maggi se licenció en Derecho en una universidad de México y trabajó en la fiscalía del estado de Coahuila, en el norte del país. Su trabajo le obligaba a trabajar muchos fines de semana y hasta altas horas de la noche, haciendole difícil cumplir con sus obligaciones como madre soltera. “Me siento muy mal por no haber podido pasar más tiempo con mis hijas”, añade. “Me perdí gran parte de su infancia”.
Durante un año, cuando sus hijas estaban en la escuela primaria, Maggi las matriculó en un internado, las dejaba allí los domingos por la noche y las recogía los viernes por la tarde. Algunos fines de semana, se llevaba a las niñas a su oficina, aunque sabía que no era un lugar adecuado para ellas. Maggi anhelaba un trabajo diferente en el que pudiera pasar más tiempo con ellas.
Hace unos 15 años, cuando la violencia se recrudeció en México, Maggi empezó a pensar seriamente en emigrar. Su primo fue secuestrado y los policías con los que trabajaba fueron asesinados. Maggi recibió amenazas de muerte de los delincuentes a los que había ayudado a procesar. Entonces, un día, unos hombres la detuvieron y le dijeron que sabían dónde vivía y que tenía hijas. “Fue entonces cuando dije: esto no es seguro para mí”.
En 2011, Maggi y las niñas emigraron a Estados Unidos, llevándose todo lo que cupo en cuatro maletas. Terminaron en El Paso, Texas, donde Maggi vendía gelatina y tamales para ganarse la vida. Tres años más tarde, se mudaron a Albuquerque. Maggi conoció a su marido, se casaron y poco después dieron la bienvenida a un hijo, su cuarto hijo.
En Albuquerque, Maggi se estableció en una vida dedicada al cuidado infantil profesional, lo que le resultó natural y le permitió pasar más tiempo con su familia que lo que había podido en México. Ella y su marido se sometieron a un intenso proceso de selección y se convirtieron en padres de acogida. (Nuevo México no exige que las personas tengan un estatus migratorio legal para ser padres de acogida). Maggi matriculó a su hijo menor en un centro Head Start, donde los administradores la animaron a empezar a trabajar como voluntaria. Le encantaba estar en el aula con los niños, pero sin permiso de trabajo no podía convertirse en profesora de Head Start. En su lugar, después de que su hijo empezara la escuela primaria, empezó a ofrecer cuidados infantiles de manera informal a familias que conocía. Maggi obtuvo la licencia del estado hace dos años, tras un largo proceso que incluyó varias inspecciones, una verificación de antecedentes y una formación obligatoria en RCP y principios de cuidado infantil.
Maggi no tardó en crear un negocio muy respetado que cubría una necesidad acuciante en Albuquerque. El suyo es uno de los pocos programas de cuidado infantil de la zona que ofrece atención las 24 horas del día, los 7 días de la semana, algo poco habitual en el sector a pesar de la gran necesidad que existe. Los padres que confían en ella son profesores, cuidadores de personas mayores y personas que atienden llamadas al 911.
En la sala de estar de Maggi, los niños se mueven libremente entre áreas de aprendizaje cuidadosamente seleccionadas con estanterías repletas de juguetes de colores, materiales de arte colocados en una mesa en miniatura y filas de libros. Los pósters educativos de sus paredes refuerzan los colores, los números y las formas. Le encanta exponer a los niños a nuevas experiencias, y con frecuencia los lleva de excursión a tiendas de comestibles o restaurantes. Es cariñosa, pero tiene grandes expectativas para los niños, insistiendo en que recojan lo que ensucian, sigan las instrucciones y digan “por favor” y “gracias”.
“Quiero que tengan valores”, dijo Maggi. “Les enseñamos a respetar a los animales, a las personas y a los demás”.
A finales de 2024, el negocio de Maggi estaba floreciendo y ella esperaba seguir creciendo.
Aún no se han publicado datos sobre hasta qué punto las políticas de inmigración de la actual administración han afectado a la disponibilidad de servicios de cuidado infantil. Pero las entrevistas con los proveedores de cuidado infantil y las investigaciones apuntan a lo que puede suceder en el futuro, y que ya está sucediendo.
Después de que una política de 2008 permitiera al Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas verificar el estatus migratorio de las personas detenidas por la policía local, se produjo un marcado descenso en la matriculación en guarderías tanto de niños inmigrantes como no inmigrantes. También se produjo una disminución en la oferta de trabajadores de guarderías. Aunque las mujeres eran una minoría entre los deportados, los investigadores descubrieron que la política provocó temor en las comunidades de inmigrantes y muchos abandonaron sus rutinas normales.
En el sector del cuidado infantil, eso es problemático, según los expertos. Los inmigrantes que trabajan en este sector suelen tener un alto nivel de formación y están muy capacitados para interactuar positivamente con los niños, incluso más que los trabajadores nativos. Si una parte cualificada de la mano de obra es esencialmente “purgada” porque tiene demasiado miedo de ir a trabajar, eso reducirá la calidad del cuidado infantil, afirma Chris Herbst, profesor asociado de la Universidad Estatal de Arizona que ha estudiado el efecto de la política de inmigración en el cuidado infantil. “Como resultado, los niños recibirán un servicio deficiente”.
Los programas domiciliarios como el de Maggi se encuentran entre los más vulnerables. Los hijos de inmigrantes son más propensos a estar en esos entornos de cuidado infantil. Sin embargo, en la década anterior a la pandemia, el número de programas domiciliarios disminuyó en un 25 % en todo el país, en parte debido a las dificultades financieras para mantener este tipo de negocios.
Una mañana reciente, Maggi estaba de pie en su sala de estar, vestida con una bata blanca adornada con coloridas mariquitas de dibujos animados. El año pasado, la sala habría estado llena de niños. Ahora está en silencio, salvo por la charla de Kay, la única niña en edad preescolar a la que cuida cada día. (The Hechinger Report no utiliza el nombre completo de Kay para proteger su privacidad). Mientras la pequeña se sentaba en una de las mesitas a hacer una manualidad, Maggi acunaba al bebé, que acababa de despertarse de la siesta. Los ojos del bebé se fijaron en el rostro de Maggi mientras ella lo mimaba.
“¡Hola, chiquito!”, le dijo en español. Él esbozó una sonrisa y el rostro de Maggi se iluminó.
Mientras una de sus hijas se encargaba de alimentar al recién nacido, Maggi siguió a Kay al exterior. La niña de preescolar saltaba del arenero a los columpios y a la casita de juegos, con Maggi siguiéndola diligentemente y jugando a su lado.
Los defensores y expertos afirman que el aumento de las medidas de control de la inmigración puede causar estrés y traumas a los niños pequeños. En Estados Unidos, uno de cada cuatro niños menores de seis años tiene al menos un progenitor nacido en el extranjero. Credit: Jackie Mader/The Hechinger Report
Finalmente, Kay se detuvo y apoyó la cabeza en la cadera de Maggi. Maggi le acarició suavemente la cabeza y le preguntó si estaba lista para mostrar sus habilidades preescolares. Las dos se sentaron en una mesita a la sombra y Kay observó con entusiasmo mientras Maggi sacaba pequeños juguetes de plástico. Kay apiló tres tortugas de plástico. “¡Mamá, mira! ¡Son amigas!”, dijo Kay, riendo.
Kay llegó al programa de Maggi después de que su madre la sacara de otro programa en el que sentía que no la trataban bien. Aquí, Kay es tan feliz que se esconde cuando su madre viene a recogerla. Sin embargo, a Kay le falta un aspecto clave de la experiencia del cuidado infantil. Normalmente, la niña tendría varios amigos de su edad con los que jugar. Ahora, cuando le preguntan quiénes son sus amigos, nombra a las hijas adultas de Maggi.
A Maggi le preocupan aún más los niños que ya no ve. La mayoría están ahora al cuidado de sus abuelos, pero es poco probable que esos familiares sepan cómo estimular el desarrollo y la educación de los niños, dijo Maggi. Muchos no pueden correr con los niños como ella lo hace, y es más probable que recurran a las tabletas o la televisión para entretenerlos.
Ha visto los efectos en los niños que abandonan su programa y regresan más tarde habiendo retrocedido. “Algunos de ellos están haciendo bien las cosas conmigo, y luego, cuando regresan, se han quedado atrás”, dijo. Por ejemplo, un niño al que Maggi solía cuidar acababa de empezar a caminar cuando su madre lo sacó de la guardería a principios de este año, al comienzo de la campaña de represión de la inmigración. Al estar al cuidado de un familiar, Maggi descubrió que ahora pasan gran parte del día sentados en casa.
Antes de que comenzara la segunda administración Trump, el panorama de la atención infantil parecía prometedor en Nuevo México, un estado con una tasa de pobreza infantil crónicamente alta. En 2022, Nuevo México comenzó a implementar una serie de cambios en las políticas de atención infantil. Los votantes aprobaron una enmienda constitucional que garantiza el derecho a la educación infantil temprana, con financiación sostenida para apoyarla. El estado ahora permite que las familias que ganan hasta el 400 % del nivel federal de pobreza, o casi 125.000 dólares al año, puedan optar a la guardería gratuita. Eso incluye a la mayoría de los hogares del estado. Entre otros cambios está que ahora se paga más a los proveedores por los niños que inscriben a través del programa de asistencia del estado.
El aumento ha sido útil para muchos proveedores, incluida Maggi. Antes de la pandemia, recibía unos 490 dólares al mes del estado por cada niño en edad preescolar inscrito en su programa, frente a los 870 dólares al mes que recibe ahora. Si inscribe a bebés que cumplen los requisitos para recibir asistencia para el cuidado infantil, recibe 1.100 dólares al mes, casi 400 dólares más que antes de la pandemia. Sin embargo, necesita que los niños estén inscritos para recibir los pagos. El hecho de que su programa funcione las 24 horas del día, los siete días de la semana, le ayuda. Gana dinero extra del estado cuando cuida a los niños por las tardes y los fines de semana, y recibe una mensualidad para cubrir los gastos de los niños en acogida que recibe.
Los defensores del cuidado infantil en Nuevo México están preocupados porque la política de inmigración afectará al progreso del sector. “Me preocupa que podamos perder centros de educación infantil que podrían ayudar a las familias trabajadoras”, afirmó Maty Miranda, organizadora de OLÉ Nuevo México, una organización sin ánimo de lucro dedicada a la defensa de los derechos. “Podríamos perder a valiosos profesores y los niños perderían esos fuertes vínculos”. Las medidas de control de la inmigración han tenido “un enorme impacto emocional” en los proveedores del estado, añadió.
Las autoridades estatales no respondieron a una solicitud de datos sobre cuántos proveedores de cuidado infantil son inmigrantes. En todo el estado, los inmigrantes representan alrededor del 13 % de la población activa total.
Muchos educadores locales de la primera infancia están asustados debido a la aplicación más extrema de las leyes de inmigración, al igual que lo están los niños a su cargo, dijo Miranda. “A pesar del miedo, los maestros me dicen que cuando entran en sus aulas, intentan olvidar lo que está pasando fuera”, añadió. “Son profesionales que intentan continuar con su trabajo”.
Maggi dijo que está tan ocupada con los niños que permanecen a su cuidado que no tiene tiempo extra para trabajar en otro empleo y obtener más ingresos. No especula sobre cuánto tiempo podrá sobrevivir su familia, sino que prefiere centrarse en la esperanza de que las cosas mejoren.
El mayor temor de Maggi en este momento es el bienestar de los hijos de los inmigrantes a los que ella y tantos otros proveedores de servicios a domicilio atienden. Sabe que algunos de sus niños y familias corren el riesgo de ser detenidos por el ICE, y que ese tipo de interacciones, para los niños, pueden provocar trastornos de estrés postraumático, alteraciones en el desarrollo cerebral y cambios de comportamiento. Algunos de los padres de Maggi le han dejado números de emergencia por si son detenidos por los funcionarios de inmigración.
Muchos de los niños a los que Maggi cuida después de la escuela tienen la edad suficiente para comprender que la deportación es una amenaza. “Muestran miedo, porque sus padres están asustados”, dijo Maggi. “Los niños están empezando a vivir con eso”.
En medio de los vertiginosos cambios políticos, Maggi intenta seguir mirando hacia adelante. Está trabajando para mejorar sus habilidades en inglés. Su marido está obteniendo una credencial para poder ayudarla más en su programa. Sus tres hijas están estudiando para convertirse en educadoras de la primera infancia, con el objetivo de unirse al negocio familiar. Con el tiempo, quiere atender a niños de preescolar inscritos en el programa estatal, lo que le proporcionará una fuente de ingresos estable.
A pesar de toda la incertidumbre, Maggi dice que la sostiene un propósito mayor. “Quiero que disfruten de su infancia”, dijo en una tarde soleada, mirando con cariño a Kay mientras la niña dejaba sus pequeños zapatos rosas a un lado y saltaba a un arenero. Es el tipo de infancia que Maggi recuerda en México. Kay se rió encantada cuando Maggi se agachó y vertió arena fresca sobre los pies de la pequeña. “Una vez que creces, no hay vuelta atrás”.
The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.
The Trump administration moved quickly after taking office to open dozens of investigations into schools and universities nationwide. Most of those announced publicly mark a dramatic shift in priorities from previous administrations.
The Education Department and other agencies are looking into allegations of antisemitism and racial discrimination against white students at dozens of colleges. The agency also has begun investigating policies that protect transgender athletes and, in some cases, targeted entire state departments of education as part of that work.
Related: Become a lifelong learner. Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter featuring the most important stories in education.
Here’s a look at investigations the Trump administration has announced. This map and list will be updated. Know of an investigation we missed? Tell us: [email protected].
Although the majority of investigations that have been opened are in states considered to be liberal, almost every state in the country has at least one entity under scrutiny. And many institutions face more than one investigation.
To date, colleges and universities have received the most attention from the administration, with more than 60 targeted over alleged incidents of antisemitism and another 45 under scrutiny over their work with a program that aims to increase diversity among Ph.D. candidates. Most of the K-12 investigations involve transgender policies, including those about access to sports and locker rooms.
Contact investigations editor Sarah Butrymowicz at [email protected] or on Signal: @sbutry.04
The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.
Agencies in at least 28 states and the District of Columbia have issued guidance on the use of artificial intelligence in K-12 schools.
More than half of the states have created school policies to define artificial intelligence, develop best practices for using AI systems and more, according to a report from AI for Education, an advocacy group that provides AI literacy training for educators.
Despite efforts by the Trump administration to loosen federal and state AI rules in hopes of boosting innovation, teachers and students need a lot of state-level guidance for navigating the fast-moving technology, said Amanda Bickerstaff, the CEO and co-founder of AI for Education.
“What most people think about when it comes to AI adoption in the schools is academic integrity,” she said. “One of the biggest concerns that we’ve seen — and one of the reasons why there’s been a push towards AI guidance, both at the district and state level — is to provide some safety guidelines around responsible use and to create opportunities for people to know what is appropriate.”
North Carolina, which last year became one of the first states to issue AI guidance for schools, set out to study and define generative artificial intelligence for potential uses in the classroom. The policy also includes resources for students and teachers interested in learning how to interact with AI models successfully.
In addition to classroom guidance, some states emphasize ethical considerations for certain AI models. Following Georgia’s initial framework in January, the state shared additional guidance in June outlining ethical principles educators should consider before adopting the technology.
In the absence of regulations at the federal level, states are filling a critical gap, said Maddy Dwyer, a policy analyst for the Equity in Civic Technology team at the Center for Democracy & Technology, a nonprofit working to advance civil rights in the digital age.
While most state AI guidance for schools focuses on the potential benefits, risks and need for human oversight, Dwyer wrote in a recent blog post that many of the frameworks are missing out on critical AI topics, such as community engagement and deepfakes, or manipulated photos and videos.
“I think that states being able to fill the gap that is currently there is a critical piece to making sure that the use of AI is serving kids and their needs, and enhancing their educational experiences rather than detracting from them,” she said.
Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: [email protected].
As student visa backlogs continue to plague US embassies around the world and the start of the fall semester looms, a bipartisan group of 14 lawmakers have urged the US state department to resolve issues with Indian student visas.
“As members of Congress who represent research universities, we are concerned by reports from our constituent universities about Indian students who have been unable to obtain visas to continue their education in the United States,” they urged Rubio.
Indian students, the largest group of international students in the US, contribute $9 billion annually to the US economy, added the lawmakers, led by Democratic congresswoman Deborah Ross of North Carolina.
In a letter sent to the State Department on July 24, the group said they had seen “first-hand” how the contributions of Indian students to science and research “keep our nation competitive”.
“We are dismayed at the possibility that many of these bright young individuals may be blocked… from continuing their education and research in the United States,” they continued.
Thirteen of the letter’s 14 signatories are member of the Democratic party, with Nebraska representative Don Bacon the only Republican to join the efforts.
With classes starting in just over a month, thousands of students… are at risk of missing the start of the academic year
The letter follows a near four-week suspension of student visa appointments by the state department that began during the peak season for visa processing, causing continued backlogs that remain nearly one month on from the lifting of the freeze.
Though backlogs are impacting students across the globe, the congresspeople raised particular concerns about delays at Indian embassies, with the Indian mission website still carrying a warning that the scheduling of visa appointments this summer cannot be guaranteed.
The Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) is understood to have taken the matter up with the US Embassy in New Delhi as well as the US State Department, with news of the delays being widely circulated by Indian media.
As previously reported by The PIE News, some Indian education consultancies are expecting 80% declines in student levels going to the US, reporting that students are “refreshing their portal everyday” in search of appointments.
The largest source market to the US, visa issuance to Indian students saw a notable drop this May, falling by 41% compared to the same period in 2025, with stakeholders fearing that June data will reveal a worsening picture as the full impact of the visa pause takes hold.
Across the board, May 2024 data showed a 22% year-on-year reduction in the number of F-1 visas issued. Exchange visitor visas were also down 13%.
Appealing to Rubio, the congresspeople emphasised the integral contributions of Indian students to research universities in the US, as well as the wider value of educational exchange: “vital to encouraging collaboration between our nations”.
Advocacy efforts are also stepping up in the sector, led by the US for Success Coalition, a national alliance of more than 50 organisations spanning business, education and innovation.
“This delay and the resulting backlogs couldn’t have come at a worse time,” said Jill Welch, spokesperson for the coalition.
“With classes starting in just over a month, thousands of students – particularly from high-demand countries like India – are at risk of missing the start of the academic year,” Welch said.
The coalition highlighted the widespread consequences of the visa backlogs. If students are barred from entering the US, it could jeopardise the country’s position as the leading destination for global talent, with ripple effects touching local economies and long-term implications for scientific research.
“When we close doors – intentionally or by bureaucratic delay – we send a clear message to the world: that the US may longer be the destination of choice for the best and brightest,” it said. “That is not just a lost opportunity; it is a strategic risk”.
The alliance has called on the State Department to immediately “surge” resources to process new and returning international student visas and ensure there is interview capacity in high-demand countries.
Referring to Rubio’s new rules around social media vetting, it called on the department to prioritise both security and efficiency, “so that screening processes do not become barriers to opportunity”.
“For every three international students, one US job is created or sustained,” said the coalition, citing their annual economic contribution of nearly $44bn annually.
What’s more, “they are ambassadors of democracy and American values creating allyship between the United States and other countries,” they said, highlighting the value of people-to-people exchanges in ensuring the country’s national security.
The increasingly challenging visa policy landscape is already having an impact on student interest, with young people increasingly turning to other destinations, namely the UK.
Sector leaders are calling for “immediate action” to prevent the worst damages while there is still time before the full extent of declines become clear in September.
Min, a student from Bangladesh, remembers his excitement after learning he had been accepted into a US university. It meant he would be learning from some the world’s leading medical experts in healthcare – learning skills he hopes to use to improve the healthcare system in his home country.
Min, who asked not to use his name due to the enhanced US screening policies, was recently granted a visa and is due to start his freshman year this fall.
The road to get there, however, was not a smooth one. Following the State Department’s three-week worldwide pause on interviews in June, and the implementation of enhanced screening policies, many of Min’s peers had their interview appointments delayed.
It took Min three months to secure his required interview at the embassy for his student visa. He said the software used to schedule the interview kept crashing and the embassy had limited appointment times, checking multiple times a day for openings.
While Min saw his visa approved, several of his friends had their student visas denied at the end of their interview, he said, leading some of them to apply for universities in other countries. Most often, it’s another English-speaking country, since that’s the most common secondary language for Bangladeshi students, he said.
“In recent, years, a lot of my friends have applied to Australia, because for the US, there are more uncertainties,” Min said.
The student visa application process has come into the spotlight recently. That’s because of the Trump administration’s changes to how visa officers review students’ social media activity. Some visa applicants have expressed concerns that the policies could lead to an increase in visa denials.
However, education nonprofits have for years raised alarms about high rates of visa denials and long interview wait times – warning it could hinder the global competitiveness of US higher education.
Visa denials differ for world regions
The US State Department rejected over 650,000 student visa applications worldwide from 2018 through 2022. Students from developing nations in South Asia and Africa have their visas rejected at much higher rates compared to those from wealthier countries.
That’s according to a study that looked at eight years’ data – authored by The Presidents’ Alliance and Shorelight student support company. The report shines a light on experiences of students from Asia and Africa, who struggle with long wait times to schedule visa interviews.
For European students who apply to study in the US, getting denied entry is rare – fewer than 8% in 2023, according to the study. That’s a stark difference from Africa, where 61% of students were denied a visa that year, not including South Africa and some neighbouring countries with very low denial rates. For South Asia, including Nepal, between 36% and 55% students have their visas denied each year.
The world’s population of young, smart minds is exploding out of sub-Saharan Africa
Carly O’Keefe, Monroe Community College, Rochester
Rajika Bhandari, a senior advisor with the Presidents’ Alliance who led the study, said the findings reflect patterns that college administrators have noticed for decades.
“From the campus perspective, these students have been fully vetted and deemed worthy of being offered admission,” said Bhandari, once a US international student herself. “Yet they’re facing this final barrier.”
A visa officer decides whether to grant a student entry after interviewing them at an embassy or consulate. One goal of the interview, lasting several minutes at most, is to assess whether the student is likely to return to their homeland after graduating.
If the student can’t demonstrate strong homeland connections – such as through owning property, having a job lined up after graduation, or strong family ties – it can be grounds for denial. The visa officer will also review documents showing the student’s eligibility to study internationally, including financial statements showing the student can afford college.
Many students, Bhandari said, have expressed concerns to college leaders that they’ve met every requirement but are still denied – leaving them bewildered. Visa officers rarely share the specific reason for the denial with applicants.
“You may go back a second time and be denied yet again because you don’t know what it is that you need to fix,” Bhandari said.
The State Department didn’t directly respond to a request for comment but has said in the past that it’s committed to a fair visa review process. The department said that applications, especially from Africa, have skyrocketed in the past few years and “a commensurate increase in denials is expected.”
According to the department, more visas were issued to African students in 2023 than ever before, with Nigerian students granted the highest share. However, the visa denial rate for African students grew that year by three percentage points, according to the study, while the denial rate for European and South American students dropped.
The State Department doesn’t publish data on visa denials but does disclose how many student visas are issued for each country every month. So far this year, the number of F-1 visas issued for Nigerian students is 23% less compared to this time last year, based on data published through May. For Bangladeshi students, like Min, the number of visas issued is about the same as last year.
Experience with getting a visa denied
Sooraj Sahani, entering his sophomore year at Texas State, knows how confusing and emotional it can be to have a visa denied. He had his visa denied on the first try, before applying again and getting it approved three weeks before the start of freshman year in fall of 2024.
In his village in the plains of Nepal, Sahani fed his fascination for physics by taking online classes from some of the world’s top experts. He aspired to be like the professors who mentored him virtually through the World Science Scholars program, a nonprofit based in New York City. That’s why Sahani decided he wanted to study at a US university, determined to become a theoretical physics researcher.
When he learned that Texas State was offering him a full undergraduate scholarship, he thought he was on track to fulfil his dream. His scholarship meant the US couldn’t deny his student visa for financial reasons, Sahani said. But he still ran into issues.
When Sahani tried last summer to book a visa interview appointment for the US embassy in Kathmandu, Nepal, all the slots were full for weeks. Instead, he traveled to New Delhi for an interview with a visa officer. Sahani said that, at the end of the roughly one-minute interview, the officer told him he wasn’t eligible for a visa without any explanation.
Students can wait up to nine months for a US visa interview in Dhaka, Bangladesh
US State Department data
“With a very sad face, I had to come back from India. It took me some time to tell myself that, OK, it happens. I’m not giving up,” he said.
After getting his visa denied, Sahani scheduled his second visa interview appointment at the embassy in Kathmandu. To secure a slot, he repeatedly woke up in the middle of the night to check online for appointments.
“I woke up at 2am, 3am, 4am, just to see if there was a visa slot. We have a lot of students applying for the US but we just have one embassy,” he said.
Since releasing its study, the Presidents’ Alliance and other education nonprofits have met with State Department leaders about improving visa processing. The department says it’s made progress in lowering wait times worldwide by hiring more staff and giving visa officers the authority to waive some interviews.
However, some countries still have too few embassies or staff members to keep up with the high number of students, Bhandari said. For the embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh, it’s currently a nine month wait time for a student visa interview, according to the department’s website.
“Academic loss and economic loss”
Higher education leaders warn that if visa issues persist, they’ll hinder the US’s global competitiveness. In January NAFSA wrote a letter to the incoming Trump administration calling for action to make visa processing times more predictable. The letter also advocates for creating a pathway for international students to become permanent residents after graduation, which, according to Bhandari, may help to address visa denials.
If students can choose to live and work in the US after graduation, they wouldn’t have to prove their intentions to return to their home country – a source of many denials. In April, Congress introduced the Keep STEM Talent Act with bipartisan support, aiming to create this kind of “dual intent” pathway for international students pursuing science, technology, or maths degrees. Most of the 1.1 million international students who came to the US last academic year chose STEM fields.
The high rate of visa denial for African students is both an academic loss and an economic loss, said Carly O’Keefe, the designated school official for international student enrolment at Monroe Community College in Rochester, NY.
Like many other states, college enrolment in New York has been declining. New York’s comptroller warns that 2025 could mark the start of an “enrolment cliff” – a sharp decline in applications reflecting the steady decline in US births since a historic high in 2007. Several colleges in the state have closed in recent years due to low enrolment.
Meanwhile, Africa’s young population is increasing. By 2050, Nigeria is expected to become the world’s third most populous country, behind only India and China. Africa isn’t just full of college-aged youth, O’Keefe said, but also innovation led by youth. As technology is becoming more available in Africa, the number of youth-led startups is booming.
“The world’s population of young, smart minds is exploding out of sub-Saharan Africa,” she said. “Just think of the brain power and the potential talent in the world.”
Last fall, MCC welcomed about 90 international students, the most since 2018, from 30 countries. However, as with most colleges that host international students, the number enrolled was fewer than the number who planned to come because of visa denials. Colleges across the US, O’Keefe said, are missing out on talent because of the denials.
“We’re potentially missing out on very qualified students enrolling at our colleges and universities across the country that could be doing amazing academic work,” she said.
Following a record-breaking advocacy campaign that saw 20,636 letters sent to Congress, the House of Representatives has set out drastically modified cuts to US cultural exchanges, which had been at risk of “decimation” under Trump’s previous proposed budget.
The new plans will shrink the funding cuts to the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) to 5.5% next year, as compared to the 93% initially announced in the proposed FY2026 budget.
Though the proposals still amount to a $41 million cut to current funding, “it’s nowhere close to the doomsday scenario of the [President’s budget request]” executive director of the Alliance for International Exchange Mark Overmann told The PIE News.
“This means that the conversation about FY26 is completely new. The President’s budget can be thrown out the window,” he said, welcoming the “significant show of support for exchanges from the House and a big win for us”.
The plans – laid out in the House Appropriations Bill on July 14 – propose a 22% cut to overall State Department funding and are the latest step in the FY26 budget process, expected to be finalised late this year.
The new legislation earmarks over $700m for ECA, a “surprising” figure and a vote of confidence in the value of educational and cultural exchanges.This includes $287 million for Fulbright.
“And this mark from the House means that our community’s advocacy has been heard,” said Overmann.
This means that the conversation about FY26 is completely new. The President’s budget can be thrown out the window.
Mark Overmann
Though there are still many steps to go, including a review by the Senate, the unexpected move is an encouraging development and a rare piece of good news for stakeholders who expected the worst after Trump’s “draconian” proposals this May.
While important, the President’s budget request has no sway over the final allocations, with stakeholders emphasising at the time of its release that it amounted to nothing more than a “wish list” and was not binding.
The true figures will be drawn from the House and Senate Appropriations, with the latter expected imminently.
Traditionally, the Senate has come in higher than the house for ECA funding, with stakeholders hopeful that the trend will continue this year.
The news has provided a glimmer of hope during an uncertain time for US study abroad, with 40 ECA employees caught up in the Trump administration’s mass layoffs of State Department staff last week.
