Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Student Data topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Idaho committee deadlocks on bill to require schools to record students' immigration status
Summary
A House Education Committee vote tied twice and the measure to require schools receiving state funds to record and publish student immigration status did not advance; members raised privacy, cost and constitutional concerns.
Representative Steve Tanner asked the House Education Committee to introduce RS 32,405, a proposed new chapter in state education law that would require any school or district receiving state money to record the immigration status and nationality of enrolled students and to aggregate and make that information public.
Supporters said the data would let policymakers quantify costs and needs associated with student populations that require additional services. "What this is ... is just asking for demographics," Representative Steve Tanner said, explaining the proposal would allow the state to "measure really what is the measure of the new burden that we're trying to meet." Tanner said the categories would align with federal immigration definitions.
Opponents and several committee members raised questions about how the data would be collected and published, what documentation parents would need to provide, and whether the requirement would create privacy or constitutional problems. "How did you arrive at the conclusion that collecting ... won't cost any money?" Representative Mathias asked, citing the fiscal note and the bill's reporting requirements. Representative Church asked whether a birth certificate would prove nationality. Representative Thijs and Representative Clow said the committee had not been shown a compelling state interest that would justify singling out a population of students for this data collection.
Committee members debated two procedural motions. A motion to return RS 32,405 to the sponsor failed on a 7-7 tie. The committee then voted on introducing RS 32,405 with an amendment that would change the reporting language so aggregated data would be "recorded to the superintendent of public instruction and made public." That motion also failed by a 7-7 tie, so the RS did not advance for a bill hearing.
Members who opposed advancing the RS cited cost, privacy and constitutional risk. Representative Mathias warned the measure could invite litigation and significant taxpayer expense if enacted without clearer justification. Representative Clow said he had "real constitutional flaws" concerns and cautioned against turning schools into an enforcement mechanism for immigration policy. Several members asked for clearer definitions of the terms "nationality," "made public," and what documentary proof would be required at enrollment.
The sponsor said the intent was not to deny students services. "No, that's not the intention," Tanner said when asked whether the information would be used to deny access to education. He described the request as a demographic accounting to inform education policy and budgeting.
Because both motions failed on tied roll-call votes, RS 32,405 will not move forward at this time. Several members suggested returning the RS to the sponsor for revision and clearer technical detail on how data would be collected, protected and published if the measure is refiled.
The committee then proceeded to other business.
