Member Insights: Education Access Is Under Threat: Philanthropy Can Protect Education for All Children

Education Access Is Under Threat: Philanthropy Can Protect Education for All Children

By Vivian Tseng, President and CEO, Foundation for Child Development; Board Member, Grantmakers for Education and Alejandra Vázquez Baur, Director of Immigrant Students Policy, Advocacy, & Partnerships, EdTrust

“History tells us that when policymakers succeed in impinging on the rights of one community, the circle of exclusion rarely stops there.” Lisa Sherman Luna (2026)

Many of us in education philanthropy chose this field because we believe in the power of education to enable all children to thrive and reach their full potential. Today, that core value is threatened by attacks that would roll back civil rights in education and exclude certain groups of children from schooling. We are facing a fundamental question: Is education for everyone, or only for some?

In this article, we discuss threats to the 1982 Supreme Court ruling in Plyler v. Doe, which guaranteed all students — regardless of immigration status — the right to a public education. The Plyler decision — like the 1954 Supreme Court ruling in Brown v. Board of Education, as well as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Title IX — rests on the idea that constitutionally protected rights extend to all students. That fundamental American tenet is now under attack through efforts to overturn Plyler.

We can no longer take for granted the most basic assumption that all students belong in public schools. Prior generations courageously fought for civil rights in education, and now it is our generation’s turn to uphold education access. Educators, parents, students, faith and business leaders, researchers, and civil rights lawyers are already organizing to protect education for all. There is a role for each and every funder. Philanthropy must urgently answer the call to action.

The Legacy of the Right to Education for All

A decade after passage of the historic Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Texas Legislature launched one of the first tests of its anti-discrimination protections. In 1975, the state’s legislators moved to amend Texas education law to deny undocumented students’ free enrollment in Texas public schools and withhold state funds from districts that still chose to educate them.

In 1977, the school board in Tyler Independent School District followed suit and implemented a policy charging undocumented students $1,000 annually to attend school, an impossible expense for many immigrant families. Several families, represented by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), bravely filed a lawsuit against the state of Texas, and the case, now known as Plyler v. Doe, rose all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The families and their lawyers argued that the state of Texas could not discriminate against undocumented students by denying them the free public education they provided U.S. citizens and lawful resident children. After hearing arguments from both sides, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5–4 decision that the State of Texas had violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause by denying undocumented students a free education.

In the 1982 majority opinion, Justice Brennan built on Brown v. Board of Education’s legal precedent: “Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. … In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.”

The landmark civil rights decision in Plyler established two foundational education principles:

All children, regardless of immigration status, have a constitutionally protected right to a free public K–12 education.

States cannot withhold funding for the education of undocumented students or deny enrollment of students based on their immigration status or the immigration status of their parents or guardians.

Four decades later, immigrant students in general and Plyler beneficiaries in particular have made important contributions to our country. A rigorous economic analysis of Florida schools reveals that immigrant students have a positive impact on academic outcomes for their U.S.-born classmates, likely because they encourage positive behavior. A recent report further estimates the impacts of Plyler, finding that Plyler beneficiaries have contributed to state and local income taxes at amounts that vastly overshadow the costs of educating them. Moreover, students educated under Plyler have contributed enormously to our nation’s economy and GDP.

Broader Threats to Student Safety, Attendance and Learning

For several years, federal guidance protected schools from immigration enforcement activities. That protection dissolved on day one of the Trump administration when it rescinded the guidance by executive order. ICE activity has since escalated dramatically, detaining more than 610,000 people since January 2025. Children and families have been detained at bus stops, school drop-offs, routine court hearings and homes, with enforcement leading to assaults on students and staff and claiming the lives of immigrant parents, including Johan Sebastián Guerrero, 26, in Maine; Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, 52, in Houston; and too many others.

Advocates have long decried the chilling effect that immigration enforcement has on children, and a growing body of research has documented the harm. The Urban Institute found that more than 1 in 5 adults in immigrant families with children reported that their families did not engage in essential activities such as driving, going to school or work, or visiting health centers because of immigration concerns. In a study by John Rogers and his colleagues at UCLA, principals across the country reported that students are missing school and their parents are afraid to come in because of immigration enforcement and anti-immigrant rhetoric. Principals also described increased bullying of students from immigrant families. Education scholar Sophia Rodriguez found that educators witnessed severe psycho-emotional trauma among their students, including panic attacks, fear and extreme anxiety — trauma that disrupts learning.

These results extend to educational outcomes. Economists David Figlio and Umut Ozek found that immigration enforcement reduced test scores not only for immigrant students, but also their U.S.-born peers. Maryland’s state superintendent of education has attributed declining graduation rates among the state’s Hispanic students to increased immigration enforcement.

Leading civil and immigrant rights groups, such as MALDEF and the National Immigration Law Center, have noted that ICE presence near and in schools may infringe on Plyler protections by preventing children from attending school for fear of ICE and thus enjoying their right to an education. These disruptions extend beyond immigrant students. ICE activities have exacerbated the severe drops in attendance and enrollment, including among nonimmigrant children who are caught up in this frightening environment. Following escalated enforcement last November, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools saw nearly 21,000 students, 15% of total enrollment, absent on a single day, and early enrollment reports reveal that Miami-Dade County Schools lost approximately 19,000 students at the start of the 2026-27 school year, destabilizing entire systems.

Will We Roll Progress Forward or Backward?

Anti-Plyler bills have been introduced across the country with the goal of triggering a Supreme Court challenge to overturn Plyler. The Heritage Foundation released a playbook with explicit bill text and messaging to advance this agenda.

Yet communities are also rallying to protect education for all. In Tennessee — a Republican supermajority state — educators, parents, students, faith leaders and business defeated efforts in each of the last two legislative sessions to challenge Plyler. Meanwhile, California, Illinois, Massachusetts and New York have passed affirmative Plyler protections, prohibiting the denial of education access, protecting student data from ICE and limiting immigration enforcement activities on school campuses.

At the federal level, Representative Adriano Espaillat introduced the Protecting Sensitive Locations Act to restrict immigration enforcement activities at schools and other sensitive locations. Mass protests, press coverage of ICE’s impact, and constituent pressure prompted Congress to consider new reforms in the FY 2026 budget negotiations. While these reforms were not included in the final bill, advocates built significant support for protecting sensitive locations such as schools, child-care facilities, hospitals, and houses of worship. This critical momentum must be recognized and further expanded.

Philanthropy Has a Responsibility to Act

Every funder has a role to play in upholding the promise of public education. Today’s fight requires a multipronged strategy. No one funder can do everything, but together we can knit the supports needed to protect the fundamental tenet of education for all.

1. Support organizing and coordination at the local, state and national levels. A hallmark of the Civil Rights Movement was the mass mobilization of people from different backgrounds and professions to ensure fairness, opportunity and dignity for the diverse people who comprise our nation. That same collective mobilization is needed today to protect education access for every child — no matter their background. Local organizing is essential to ensure that families, students and communities understand the harm of a Plyler rollback in a way that is culturally responsive and linguistically accessible. Educators, school and district leaders, and education allies in the faith and business community must also give voice to the moral and financial costs of restricting education access.
   
   In states where Plyler is being tested — particularly Texas, Tennessee and Florida — funders can support local coalitions anchoring this work. In Tennessee, the Education for All Tennessee coalition brings together TIRRC, TIRRC Votes, EdTrust Tennessee, Statewide Organizing for Community Empowerment and many others. In Texas, EdTrust Texas and the Texas Immigration Law Council anchor a broad coalition to protect the promise of Plyler and education access for all.
   
   National coordination is equally vital. While the initial test of Plyler starts in states, the impact will reach communities across the nation. There is no guarantee that today’s Supreme Court will rule in favor of education access for all as it did in 1982, and there is also no guarantee that states that protect immigrants will be spared political retribution. The nationwide Education for All coalition and EdTrust’s National Newcomer Network, Alejandra’s organization, track challenges and lessons learned across states, coordinate communications and messaging, and support broader strategy development and implementation. The Right Place for Kids — anchored by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops — brings together business, faith, public safety and education leaders, and recent polling shows that 87% of Republican and Republican-leaning independent voters agree that all children deserve access to education, regardless of background.

1. Support research. Research at local, state and national levels ensures that the public and policymakers have accurate information on the consequences of rolling back education access. Academic Sophia Rodriguez at New York University, the Immigration Research Initiative and economist David Figlio at the University of Rochester are among those who have documented the harms of anti-immigrant rhetoric, ICE actions and threats to Plyler on students and schools. Continued funding for research is vital to an informed and engaged public.

1. Support litigation. Civil rights lawyers are also answering the call to action, following generations of attorneys who have defended the constitutional rights of vulnerable communities. Like Brown v. Board of Education, legal progress rests on the courage of plaintiffs and the hard work of their legal defense teams. Funders can support civil rights organizations — including MALDEF, NILC and the National Center for Youth Law — that support families in fighting for education access and opportunity.

1. Use your voice beyond funding. Philanthropy’s influence extends beyond funding. Education funders can leverage their voice and convening power to sound the alarm on threats to education access. Support your education grantees in connecting with immigration rights organizations that have trusted relationships with immigrant families and have been defending Plyler. Convene different segments of the education sector to connect the dots between this fight and other attempts to dismantle education civil rights, recognizing that attacks on children of immigrants are intertwined with broader threats to education access and opportunity. 

1. See yourself in the fight. Education access is fundamentally an education issue, and education leaders and organizations must defend Plyler. The Plyler decision built on the same principles of equal protection for all as Brown v. Board, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Title IX. If Plyler returns to the court with the argument that all does not actually mean all, our fragile civil rights infrastructure in education will be at risk of collapse, threatening our core values as a nation and the foundation of our democracy.

1. Join the 1 in 4 Coalition. For funders new to these issues and those who are longstanding supporters of civil rights in education, we welcome you to join us in the 1 in 4 Coalition. Our name honors the one-quarter of children in this country who are children of immigrants and central to our country’s future success and prosperity. By coming together, we seek to educate ourselves, learn from each other and field leaders, and mount a strong collective response to ensure that our nation creates a welcoming and nurturing place for all children to thrive.

Protecting education for all is the civil rights fight of our time. Whether your focus is supporting the teacher workforce, strengthening college and career readiness, deepening family engagement, designing stronger education systems, investing in research, or fostering student achievement and well-being, protecting education access extends to your work.

The promise of education for all was achieved through the struggle of our forebears. On the 250th anniversary of this country, our generation faces the same call: to move our country forward, not backward, in ensuring education access and opportunity for every child. That is why we need all of us — in philanthropy, organizing, litigation, research and convening.

Join us in the 1 in 4 Coalition. Together, we can mount a strong collective response to ensure that our nation creates a welcoming and nurturing place for all children to thrive, regardless of background. Please act now.

About Member Insights

This article represents the opinion of the author; it is not intended to represent the views of Grantmakers for Education or its employees.

Are you interested in sharing insights from your work with the GFE grantmaking community? We invite you to write a feature article for Grantmakers for Education. As a member benefit, we publish articles on a quarterly basis on our website and feature them in our newsletter. If you work for an organization that is an Grantmakers for Education member, we welcome submissions from you. This is an opportunity to share ideas, successes, challenges or lessons that can build knowledge, grow your community and strengthen the field of education philanthropy. Contact communications[at]edfunders.org to learn more.