UC's Opportunity for Some: Campus Doors Close on Undocumented Student Employment
Photo by Jay L. Clendenin
On January 26th, 2024, the University of California suspended its plan to allow undocumented students to get campus jobs, halting initiatives to ensure financial equity for this substantial student population.
In May, urged by UCLA law professors and students, the UC regents unanimously pledged to explore a hiring plan for undocumented students in the UC system to earn legal paychecks. This collective effort was championed by the Opportunity For All Campaign, which includes the Undocumented Student-led Network, the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law, and the UCLA Labor Center. The movement’s central goal is to mitigate the current barriers that prohibit undocumented students from having the same work opportunities as their peers.
Undocumented student leaders at the University of California felt a significant win in the Opportunity for All campaign, as the UC Board of Regents announced plans to remove hiring restrictions for all UC students, regardless of immigration status. The Regents voted to implement this change and appointed a working group to develop an implementation plan by November. Yet, by the end of November, the UC missed its own deadline for moving forward with their plans. This greatly frustrated advocates and students who protested outside of the UC Regent meeting in November, trying to bring attention to their cause. Subsequently, some regents met with advocates, reaffirming their dedication to fully implement the plan promptly. They did emphasize, however, that their assurances did not encompass the entire board.
After this continual back and forth, with a 10-6 majority vote, the Regents voted in support of a motion to rescind the hiring proposal until 2025. This decision marked a significant setback for advocates and underscored the complexities surrounding the issue.
Legal Reasoning and Rebuttal
Michael Drake, the UC President, stated that the proposal to hire undocumented students was “not viable” and “carries significant risk for the institution and those we serve.” The Regents sought legal advice that revealed the proposal could pose risks due to limitations of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA). This act essentially makes it unlawful for a person or entity to knowingly hire or continue to employ unauthorized aliens for U.S. employment, and it mandates verification of work status before hiring.
However, the UCLA coalition Opportunity for All, UCLA’s Center for Immigration Law and Policy, and legal experts such as the UC Berkeley School of Law Dean, Erwin Chemerinski, argue that even though the Act bars employers from hiring undocumented workers, the UC is a state agency, and is therefore exempt from this restriction. In the coalition’s 2022 legal memo it cites that the Supreme Court has historically and continually upheld that if a federal law does not expressly reference states, state entities are not obligated by that law. Moreover, the language of the IRCA does not reportedly meet the U.S. Supreme Court’s requirement of clearly and explicitly binding states to the law. The campaign’s memo additionally emphasizes that when Congress passed the IRCA, it did not do so with the intentions of constraining state’s historical ability to determine the employment process and qualifications of state employees.
The issue of legality in attaining work on both a state and federal level poses a substantial barrier to undocumented individuals, especially undocumented students. In analyzing the legal constraints the UC expresses concern about, it is clear that these limitations are subject to interpretation. Several legal experts aiding the Opportunity for All campaign believe that the UC had the ability to interpret the law to the benefit of undocumented students, but chose not to do so. Thus, a moral question is raised with the UC’s legal interpretation being at the detriment of undocumented students’ rights.
Furthermore, although much of the UC’s past decisions in protecting undocumented students have been influenced by a push from the student body, they have typically taken actions that affirm their protections. In 2017, the UC system sued the Trump administration for ending DACA, which gave undocumented immigrants protection from deportation and a work permit. This legal battle continued into 2020, with the Supreme Court upholding the program; however lower court decisions since have prevented the Biden administration from processing new applications. The UC has always taken pride in its goals to ensure the well-being of its undocumented student population, yet that is not reflected in its recent actions.
In this decision, the UC was primarily concerned with the possibility of legal complexities that it may have lost sight of its moral imperative to protect and uplift such a significant proportion, at least 4,000 students, of its student body.
Implications of this Decision
Although many undocumented students are able to receive financial aid and have their tuition fully or partially covered by the state, it is important to account for the several additional financial burdens that students are faced with such as rent, utilities, food, and transportation. Since undocumented students are restricted from federal grants and assistance programs like Calfresh, they are left with few viable options to cover these costs. Calfresh is a federal program that provides low-income individuals with monthly funds to purchase food. This program has significantly helped alleviate the burden of high grocery costs for low-income students, especially college students. However, since undocumented students are limited from such benefits, they are more likely to be subject to financial strains and food insecurity.
Moreover, in the current state of expenses with skyrocketing rent prices, specifically within college towns, these financial obstacles are intensified for undocumented students who are unable to secure jobs. Most students, even those with less financial constraints or with some form of financial support, feel the need to take on at least one job to reduce the burden of rising rent prices. Thus, there are great concerns raised when undocumented students are not given equal access to opportunities that may ease their financial challenges.
Even though some undocumented students may be able to get off-campus jobs while still being technically legally protected, these jobs will likely not offer them the same protections and accommodations as an on-campus job. Specifically, off-campus jobs are less likely to coordinate work hours with academic commitments, forcing students to work extensive hours to make ends meet. There are also more associated risks regarding mistreatment by employers and fears surrounding being reported to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Many students will also just resort to underground work in desperation for some income and are further subjected to inhumane and unjust working conditions. UC Regent John Pérez, who voted no on the motion to suspend the hiring plan, echoed this sentiment stating “We can fool ourselves into thinking that our students aren’t working. They are. They’re working in underground jobs subjected to inhumane and horrific conditions.”
Additionally, the UC barring the employment of undocumented students not only impacts students’ abilities to work generally but additionally restricts them from opportunities that could enhance their educational experience such as research or campus-sponsored internships. This extends past undergraduate education, encroaching on undocumented students’ ability to work at the UC post-graduation if they are interested in teaching opportunities. Without access to the same opportunities as other students, undocumented students are forced to stagnate in their educational success while watching their peers flourish.
The recent decision of the UC regents also signifies a loss of hope for undocumented students in the UC system. After several months of the UC delaying their decision in adopting this hiring proposal, the majority ruling in suspending the program was a disheartening blow. Students dedicated much of their time and energy to rally for this cause, laying their hearts on the line, to be met with an outcome that continues to restrict them from equitable opportunities. A few days before the decision, at least 20 undocumented students went on a hunger strike to pressure the Board of Regents in implementing the proposal and many other students risked being arrested just to rally for their basic rights.
This decision, in conjunction with several other systemic barriers for undocumented students in the UC, has great implications for students both in their educational experiences and in future movements towards financial equity.
The Future for Undocumented Students and UC Hiring Opportunities
Assemblymember David Alvarez introduced AB 2586, also known as the Opportunity for All Act, on February 14th, 2024 to allow California colleges and universities to hire undocumented students. On April 9th, 2024, a committee in the California State Assembly unofficially passed the bill with a majority vote of 8-2. This bill would bypass hiring restrictions and benefit the estimated 45,000 undocumented students in California. AB 2586 could be a step towards finally easing the ongoing efforts of the Opportunity for All to secure equity in opportunities for undocumented students.
While legal protections are crucial for ensuring equal hiring opportunities for undocumented students, it is important to continually support advocacy efforts for this cause to support students who have been tirelessly advocating for themselves. Supporting undocumented students and amplifying their voices brings us closer to fostering an equitable environment within UC and California colleges, ensuring all students benefit irrespective of their documentation status.