Hillsborough speakers urge board to shield students from immigration enforcement; superintendent reiterates legal limits

Multiple residents told the Hillsborough County School Board on Jan. 28 that immigration enforcement in schools would traumatize children and deter families from enrolling them. The board heard about a string of public comments asking the district to adopt policies that would slow or block immigration-related activities on school campuses.

Speakers urged the district to use policies and legal review to create procedural safeguards. Peter Horstman, introduced himself as “a 16 year resident and taxpayer of Hillsborough County,” and said "public schools should be a safe place" where children are not called out of class over parents’ immigration status. Several other speakers, including Luis Salazar and Dhruv Vaughn, described families’ fear about sending children to school and urged the board to use policy to slow enforcement actions in schools so children can remain in class.

The concern surfaced repeatedly in public comment. A commenter who identified themself as the newly elected president of the Democratic Public Education Caucus for Florida said districts must protect children "regardless of their actual or perceived race, color, national origin, citizenship, immigration status, or the status of their parents or guardians." Several speakers referenced historical harms and urged civil disobedience or administrative measures to keep students safe.

Superintendent Adrienne T. Ayers responded during her superintendent’s comments by citing legal constraints and district policy. She read language from a consent decree and said the district cannot ask about a student’s or a parent’s immigration status: "No district shall inquire into a student's or his parents' immigration status." Ayers said the district dispatched clarifying guidance to principals on Jan. 28 and reminded board members that board policy 5540 (student rights and responsibilities/civility guidance) frames interactions with families and staff. She said the district will comply with local, state and federal law while taking reasonable steps to protect students.

Board members did not take formal rulemaking action at the meeting. Several members requested continued legal and administrative briefing so they can consider whether policy adjustments are needed. The superintendent said staff would continue to provide guidance and communications to school leaders and the public as the situation develops.

Community members who raised the issue also called attention to a separately reported incident at a high school that a speaker said involved perceived mistreatment of a parent and resulting disciplinary steps; that complaint was relayed through a translator during the public-comment period and described as an ongoing personnel/discipline concern rather than a board action.

The board did not vote on any change to existing district policy during the Jan. 28 meeting. The superintendent said staff will follow up with principals and keep the board informed of further legal or operational developments.