HR-8369-119
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Sponsored by Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL)
What it does
This bill would amend the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) to prohibit any educational agency or institution from receiving federal education funds if it has a policy or practice of releasing student education records or other personally identifiable student information — including directory information — for immigration enforcement purposes. The only exception would be if a student's parents provide written consent specifying the records to be released, the reasons, and the recipient, with a copy provided to the parents and student.
Who benefits
Students from immigrant families — including U.S. citizen children with unauthorized immigrant parents — whose school records would be shielded from immigration enforcement agencies. Unauthorized immigrant students themselves, who would face reduced risk of identification through school data. School administrators and staff who want a clear legal basis for declining to share student data with immigration authorities. Privacy advocates broadly, as the bill strengthens student data protections. Mixed-status families who may currently avoid enrolling children in school out of fear of data disclosure.
Who is hurt
Federal immigration enforcement agencies (e.g., ICE) that may use school records as one tool in locating individuals subject to removal orders. Schools in jurisdictions that currently cooperate with immigration enforcement, which could lose federal funding if they continue those practices. School districts that may face administrative and legal uncertainty in determining what constitutes an "immigration enforcement purpose." Taxpayers and students in districts that lose federal funding as a result of noncompliance. State and local governments that have chosen cooperative immigration enforcement policies, whose discretion would be constrained.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the Supreme Court held in Plyler v. Doe (1982) that all children have a constitutional right to a public education regardless of immigration status, and that schools sharing student data with immigration authorities creates a chilling effect that drives families to keep children out of school — undermining that right in practice. They contend that FERPA already protects student privacy broadly, and this bill closes a gap by explicitly extending those protections to immigration enforcement contexts, ensuring schools remain safe educational environments rather than data sources for enforcement operations.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that this bill would use federal funding as a lever to obstruct lawful federal immigration enforcement, potentially conflicting with the Supremacy Clause and the federal government's plenary power over immigration as affirmed in Arizona v. United States (2012). They contend that withholding funds from cooperating schools punishes jurisdictions that choose to assist federal law enforcement, and that immigration authorities may have legitimate, court-authorized needs for records — such as locating individuals subject to final removal orders — that the bill's blanket restriction would impede regardless of judicial oversight.
Constitutional context
The Spending Clause (Art. I, §8) gives Congress broad authority to attach conditions to federal funds, but South Dakota v. Dole (1987) requires those conditions to be related to the federal interest in the program. Because FERPA governs student privacy in federally funded education, a condition protecting student data privacy is likely germane. Separately, the bill intersects with the federal government's plenary immigration power under Art. I, §8, cl. 4 and the Supremacy Clause — opponents may argue the restriction interferes with federal enforcement, while supporters may argue Congress itself is setting the enforcement boundary.
Checks and balances
Congress would gain authority to condition federal education funding on student data privacy practices; the Department of Education would enforce compliance; schools retain the ability to comply with court orders or parental consent exceptions, and courts would remain available to review any enforcement actions or constitutional challenges.
Historical precedent
FERPA (1974) established the baseline framework for protecting student education records from unauthorized disclosure; this bill would extend that framework to explicitly cover immigration enforcement, an application not previously codified in federal statute.