Black teachers: How to recruit them and make them stay
Lessons in higher education: What California can learn
Keeping California public university options open
Superintendents: Well-paid and walking away
The debt to degree connection
College in prison: How earning a degree can lead to a new life
The University of California will not allow the hiring of undocumented students for jobs on its campuses, disappointing students who pushed for the right to be employed without legal status.
Allowing those students to work campus jobs would have been “the right thing to do” but presented too many legal risks and thus was “not viable,” said Michael Drake, the system’s president, while addressing UC’s board of regents Thursday.
Drake cited several possible legal ramifications. He said the university could be “subject to civil fines, criminal penalties, or debarment from federal contracting,” while human resources staff could face prosecution if they “knowingly participate in hiring practices deemed impermissible under federal law.” He also suggested that undocumented students and their families could face prosecution or even deportation.
“I know that many in our community will be disappointed that we are unable to take immediate action. As an individual, I would like nothing more than to do so right here, right now, because it is the right thing to do,” he added. “However, we have a fiduciary responsibility to consider all possible ramifications of our actions.”
The regents voted to suspend consideration of the policy for one year. Some regents against the motion said it could be even more difficult to implement the policy a year from now, alluding to the possibility that former President Donald Trump could be back in office.
In not moving forward with the proposal, the regents “let us down today,” said Jeffry Umaña Muñoz, a UCLA undergraduate student and one of the undocumented students who organized the movement advocating for the proposal. There are more than 4,000 undocumented students across UC’s 10 campuses.
“Our classmates can apply for any job on campus, helping them not only get by financially on a daily basis but also advancing their careers, while we remain forced to rely on incredibly limited resources,” he added in a statement. “I’m deeply disappointed that the UC Regents and President Drake shirked their duties to the students they are supposed to protect and support. We as UC students deserve so much more from our university leadership.”
Several regents voted against the measure to suspend considering the policy: Keith Ellis, Jose Hernandez, John Pérez, Gregory Sarris, student regent Merhawi Tesfai and Tony Thurmond. Thurmond is an ex-officio member of the regents in his role as the state’s superintendent of public instruction. Ellis, an alumni regent, is also an ex-officio member.
A coalition of undocumented students and legal scholars started urging UC more than a year ago to allow the hiring of undocumented students. They argued that UC is permitted to do so, saying the university as a state entity is exempt from a 1986 federal statute banning the hiring of immigrants without legal status.
UC officials formally started studying the issue last spring. At that time, Pérez said it was the board’s intention to ultimately allow the hiring of undocumented students.
Pérez said Thursday that he couldn’t “think of a moment where I’ve been more disappointed sitting around this board.” Pérez was appointed as a regent in 2014 and served a one-year term as chair of the board beginning in 2019.
“We have gotten so focused on the question of what the law clearly says today, that we’re losing sight of the moral imperative of what the law should be interpreted as being,” he said. “Some of us may discount the analysis by some of our greatest legal scholars and suggest that it is just an academic exercise on what is legally permissible. But if we don’t challenge, if we don’t push, we won’t know.”
The regents’ decision Thursday comes after Politico reported Wednesday that officials in President Joe Biden’s administration privately opposed the proposal and warned UC of possible legal ramifications, even threatening that the administration could sue.
In response to a question from EdSource seeking confirmation of the Politico report, a UC spokesperson said the university “regularly engages with local, state, and federal partners on numerous issues concerning public education and for maintaining compliance with existing federal law.” The spokesperson added, though, that UC “will not characterize the nature of those discussions.”
Panelists discussed dual admission as a solution for easing the longstanding challenges in California’s transfer system.
A grassroots campaign recalled two members of the Orange Unified School District in an election that cost more than half a million dollars.
Legislation that would remove one of the last tests teachers are required to take to earn a credential in California passed the Senate Education Committee.
Part-time instructors, many who work for decades off the tenure track and at a lower pay rate, have been called “apprentices to nowhere.”
Comments (3)
Comments Policy
We welcome your comments. All comments are moderated for civility, relevance and other considerations. Click here for EdSource's Comments Policy.
Eric Welker 3 months ago3 months ago
I'm sitting here reading this and scratching my head, wondering why this is an issue. Don't legitimate employers normally screen for documentation status? It always bothers me that people who advocate for providing more opportunities for young people often don't care if the pathway breaks certain laws, particularly if it doesn't affect them directly. This quote, “We have gotten so focused on the question of what the law clearly says today, that we’re losing sight … Read More
I’m sitting here reading this and scratching my head, wondering why this is an issue. Don’t legitimate employers normally screen for documentation status? It always bothers me that people who advocate for providing more opportunities for young people often don’t care if the pathway breaks certain laws, particularly if it doesn’t affect them directly.
This quote, “We have gotten so focused on the question of what the law clearly says today, that we’re losing sight of the moral imperative of what the law should be interpreted as being”, is interesting. Isn’t the very thing that leaders with integrity are supposed to do is look at what laws are currently on the books to confirm whether or not something is 100% legal? If a different “interpretation” of the law is being sought to push an initiative through, my suggestion is to put pressure on those passing these types of laws, advocate for drafting new legislation on labor laws, and then get it on a ballot (or however it’s done in the confusing and nebulous conundrum that is the UC universe).
Or, perhaps advocacy for campus-based pathways to citizenship for undocumented students so this may be less of an issue. In any case, I think those who are wanting the UC to bend to their every whim shouldn’t be allowed to do so unless they also provide practical solutions that don’t result in the creation of whole new bureaucracies and/or getting the system into legal trouble, which in the end only hurts all students.
el 3 months ago3 months ago
Of course the university system must stay inside the law. Maybe the way to look at it is to think about what the goals are – to ensure these students get a legal pathway for a solid future, that they get access to the skills that an on-campus job would provide, and that they have the financial support to tide them over until their legal status is resolved. Perhaps there are other legal ways to achieve these results.
Nicole Tongue 3 months ago3 months ago
Why is this even a conversation? I could not get a job growing up in the US if I did not have a SSN. When did this change? Enough of the insanity.