San Diego Union High adopts formal response to immigration enforcement after months of debate

The San Diego Union High School District Board of Trustees on Feb. 12 approved a new resolution and combined board policy/administrative regulation (R2025-2026-37; BP/AR 1445) formalizing the district's procedures for responding to immigration-enforcement activity on campuses. The motion (moved by Viscantto, seconded by Williams) passed with the board recording four yes votes and one abstention.

District staff told trustees the policy aligns the district with recent California legislation (including AB 49, AB 495 and SB 98), extends existing privacy shields to district personnel, and removes staff discretion to voluntarily provide access or records to outside agencies without valid judicial process. Priscilla Sanchez, Executive Director of Student Services, said the policy creates a "legal 'no thank you'" for staff faced with requests for non-public access and calls for immediate, district-managed notification if immigration enforcement is confirmed on a campus.

Why it matters: staff and public commenters described heightened fear among some students and families around immigration enforcement and asked the district to make protections explicit. Staff emphasized the policy is intended both to protect students and to bring the district into compliance with a state deadline for posting policies and procedures.

The policy's key provisions include:

- A strict prohibition on staff voluntarily consenting to non-public access or releasing private student or personnel records without a judicial warrant, subpoena, or court order.

- A requirement that, when immigration enforcement is confirmed on a campus, the district issue an immediate notification to families and staff using the district's standard communication channels.

- Expanded privacy protections for workforce personnel records, aligning treatment of staff records more closely with the safeguards already applied to student records.

- Distribution of "know your rights" guides, new signage at school entrances, and training for site and district staff on the updated protocol.

Public reaction was mixed in the packed hearing. Ronette Humans, speaking during public comment, called the resolution "a strong improvement" and urged the district to add a hotline to connect staff with immigrant attorneys during enforcement actions. Gail Ovian, a different public commenter, urged caution and argued that state policies cannot override federal authority and that the board should avoid language that could create "legal confusion or signal resistance to federal enforcement." The record includes forceful testimony on both sides.

The board adopted a small amendment to the administrative regulation before the final vote: where the draft used the term "superintendent or designate," the board specified that operational decision-making and notification in exigent circumstances should route through a district-level designate rather than be left to site-level staff alone. Trustees said that change was intended to ensure consistent, district-managed support for site administrators during any enforcement incident.

What happens next: staff will distribute training and updated materials to sites, post the required documents to the state portal per the CDE deadline, and place posters and translated materials (state and district versions) in school offices. The resolution and the new BP/AR 1445 were recorded in the board materials as R2025-2026-37 and may be reviewed on the district's website.

Quote: "Our schools are centers of learning and safety, not points of enforcement," Priscilla Sanchez said during the presentation. "This combined policy gives staff clear language and legal backing to decline requests that do not come with proper judicial authorization."