This statement can be attributed to Wendy Cervantes, director of immigration and immigrant families at the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)
Washington, D.C. February 20, 2025 – Last night, the Trump Administration issued another baseless and misguided executive order on immigration. This latest order is yet another attempt to scare immigrant families from accessing the essential services they need to thrive.
The reality, which the order itself acknowledges, is that undocumented immigrants are already ineligible for the vast majority of federal programs. States and localities receive federal funding for essential services that benefit all residents, regardless of their immigration status. These programs support our economy and promote public health and healthy child development. Cutting funding will hurt everyone who benefits from those programs and create a chilling effect, especially for U.S. citizen children living in a mixed-status family.
This executive order is just the administration’s latest effort to try to perpetuate misinformation about immigrant families and bully states into implementing its mass deportation agenda, which threatens to upend state and local budgets. The need for families to provide for their children doesn’t go away just because the Trump Administration and Elon Musk say so. If the federal government withholds funding, states and localities will need to determine how to support their residents.
CLASP remains committed to supporting immigrants and their families, and we call on our anti-poverty partners to push back against the Trump Administration’s continued efforts to scapegoat and harm our immigrant community.
By Nat Baldino, Carmen McCoy, Kathy Tran, and Madison Trice
This first-of-its-kind report provides an in-depth case study analysis of young people from across the country and their paid leave needs. Conducted over 18 months, the report uses eleven detailed examples of youth ages 18 to 30 in seven states and Washington, D.C., including both localities that have access to paid leave laws and those that do not.
This report finds that youth in America, especially in regions like the South that have high populations of young Black and Brown people, desperately need policies that provide adequate and accessible paid leave from employment.
Our youth cannot thrive without robust paid leave policies that work for them whether that means taking time off to care for a sick younger sibling or a parent with a disability, dealing with a mental health issue without risking their economic security, or feeling confident applying to a job while pregnant knowing they will have leave to take care of a new infant.
By Jackie Mader
(EXCERPT)
Since 2011, child care programs were considered off-limits for immigration officials, along with churches and K-12 schools, under the federal government’s “sensitive locations” policy, said Wendy Cervantes, director of immigration and immigrant families at The Center for Law and Social Policy.
Since 2011, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)’s Sensitive Locations policy, also known as the Protected Areas policy, prohibited immigration enforcement actions in places that provided vital services important to well-being. In 2021, DHS announced a “protected areas” policy that strengthened and clarified the existing policy. However, on January 20, 2025, the Trump Administration rescinded the Protected Areas policy and instead directed immigration officials to use “common sense” as it applies to immigration enforcement in previously protected areas.
Although providers still have some protections in many formerly sensitive locations, the rescission will have devastating impacts on immigrants’ and their families’ sense of security and safety. Under the first Trump Administration, advocates documented the toxic fear and stress that came with increased immigration enforcement and the serious effects on families. This was apparent during the first Trump Administration, when due in part to increased immigration enforcement and anti-immigrant sentiment, immigrant families utilized health care services less and did not access safety net programs essential for meeting basic needs, even during the pandemic. During that time children were afraid to go to school, and those who did suffered; attendance and academic performance for students in immigrant families fell. Service providers and workers, many of whom were immigrants, had to deal with the stress of potential immigration enforcement actions in their workplace.
The guidance on limiting enforcement in and near sensitive locations played a critical role in providing families with a sense of security in places they accessed every day in order to thrive and contribute to their communities. It is imperative that Congress codify this longstanding policy so that future administrations cannot disregard protections that provide families safety
By Shira Small with support from Charis Davis, DéJon Banks, Sr., and Sonja Lennox
What’s the best way to create child care policies that work for families and providers? Give them a seat at the table. In October 2024, the Administration for Children and Families released guidance to help state child care policy makers do just that. The guidance affirms that Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) and Preschool Development Grant Birth through Five (PDG B-5) funding can be used to engage people who have lived experience with the child care subsidy system and provides best practices on how to implement effective and equitable community engagement. This includes both parents and providers, with the guidance recognizing that gathering community feedback is a key component of improving the quality of services.
We partnered with three parent advocates from the United Parent Leaders Action Network (UPLAN) to write this blog and elevate the importance of parent voice in the state child care policy making process. Their message is clear: collecting data from directly impacted groups is not enough. To implement meaningful, community-driven policy solutions, policymakers owe parents transparency, trust building, and action. Bridging the gap between those creating policy and those impacted by it is long overdue.
Charis Davis, Ohio Parent Advocacy Network: Without parent voice, we are left with old rules and outdated laws from older individuals, mostly men, that no longer understand the position and economy that we are facing. They don’t understand what it is like to raise children today. It’s important that people get to see this guidance so more entities can start engaging with parents. To build trust, there needs to be a clear starting point/understanding and communication between all parties involved. If parents have a request, states should be transparent about what they can do, how they can do it, and work together to figure out a solution. We need transparency. Transparency is essential!
DéJon Banks, Sr., UPLAN: Decisions about us cannot be made without us. A lot of things are happening behind closed doors. There need to be direct connections between community groups and the state so that the state is coming to recruit them and bring them to the table for this engagement. Engage them at the ground level. Come to the groups where they are. When we try to speak to people in government, we get a secretary or assistant, but high-ups need to be available, so people feel heard and connected and that decision makers are actually with them. It’s hard for decision makers to deny and hide when we as parents are holding people accountable by being part of the process, which this guidance can help with.
Sonja Lennox, Washington State Parent Ambassadors: Parents should be at all tables where decisions are being made, especially when it is about them. Parents’ experiences make decision makers realize things that they are missing. With the guidance, people can see it and think of problems in a new way and how policy will affect parents and families. I think the advice that I would give people trying to start engaging parent voices is to start doing focus groups and make sure they are diverse in all demographics. Ask them what is and isn’t working well with this policy, how would you change it, and how would changing it impact you, your family, and your community? And there needs to be a stipend or something else given that says: we value your voice and opinion. To build trust, states need to walk their talk. Do what you say you’re going to do.
The guidance includes the following recommendations:
The expertise of families and early educators is critical to creating effective policy. This guidance is a helpful resource and starting place for states looking to gather feedback from people who have experience with the subsidy system, and states should prioritize co-designing engagement opportunities with parents and providers and/or consulting them about their needs. To create a more equitable child care system, parents and providers should have a role in setting the table, not only sitting at it.
CLASP would like to thank Sonja Lennox, Charis Davis, and DéJon Banks, Sr. with UPLAN for providing their expertise to help draft this blog.
Since 2011, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)’s Sensitive Locations policy, also known as the Protected Areas policy, prohibited immigration enforcement actions in places that provided vital services important to well-being. In 2021, DHS announced a “protected areas” policy that strengthened and clarified the existing policy. However, on January 20, 2025, the Trump Administration rescinded the Protected Areas policy and instead directed immigration officials to use “common sense” as it applies to immigration enforcement in previously protected areas.
VIEW LIST OF ENDORSEMENTS (>750)
This statement can be attributed to Cemeré James, interim executive director of the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)
Washington, D.C., January 28, 2025 – Last night, President Trump announced unprecedented funding freezes for programs that serve people in every congressional district. By cutting off agency grant and loan programs without any notice, the Trump Administration is harming families, children, workers, and communities across the country—and imperiling our nation’s economy.
We are glad to see that numerous state attorneys general and others are challenging the legality of this attempt to override the will of Congress, which has already authorized and appropriated these funds. Congress, not the President, is empowered by the Constitution to determine how the federal government spends its funds. Even so, the harm and chaos that these freezes are already causing and will continue to inflict on popular, impactful programs like community health centers, child care subsidies, and Meals on Wheels cannot be overstated. Moreover, the administration is planning to permanently defund some programs based on arbitrary assessments of whether they meet an ideological purity test.
This power grab will affect not just the individuals and families who rely on these programs and funds but also workers in sectors all over the country. Even if funding is eventually restored, programs may not be able to meet payroll or pay their rent, and the uncertainty has significant, immediate impacts inflicting fear, confusion, and challenges. The hardworking people who look out for others in their communities are at risk of losing their livelihoods because the Trump Administration has put more focus on cutting taxes for its billionaire allies than protecting children, seniors, veterans, and millions of other Americans.
We urge the administration to reverse course and ensure that funds already appropriated by law are allocated to programs relying on them.
(EXCERPT)
Olivia Golden, interim executive director of the Center for Law and Social Policy, said in a statement on Tuesday: “This action could have devastating consequences for immigrant families and their children, including U.S. citizen children, deterring them from receiving medical attention, seeking out disaster relief, attending school, and carrying out everyday activities.”
By Maya Lora
(EXCERPT)
With the policy change, parents dropping their kids off at day care could also be approached by ICE. Doug Lent with the Maryland Family Network pointed to guidance from The Center for Law and Social Policy that says even though the previous protective policy is no longer in place, “providers and families continue to have rights that can help protect them from some immigration enforcement actions.”
By Rachel Wilensky and Stephanie Schmit
On December 20, 2024, President Biden signed the American Relief Act, 2025 into law. In lieu of passing a full new budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025, Congress passed this continuing resolution, which will keep the government funded at FY2024 levels through March 14, 2025. Among other additions, the law included an additional $500 million for the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG). Half of this funding is reserved for necessary expenses directly related to the consequences of major disasters and emergencies that will go to states impacted by these events. The other $250 million is designated as emergency discretionary funding to be made as payments to all states.
The Office of Child Care in the Administration for Children and Families has published the allocations for states for the $250 million that is designated for all states from the American Relief Act, or ARA. These allocations often help state administrators and advocates understand and plan for the resources that will soon come their way. The state funding allocations distribution for major disasters and emergencies (the additional $250 million allocated through the ARA) has not yet been released and is not included in these numbers.
CCDBG is a critical support for families with low incomes who, without access to assistance, would likely be unable to afford their current child care arrangements. However, due to limited federal funding, the program was only able to serve 15 percent of eligible children in 2021. The annual appropriations process is an important opportunity to increase federal investments in programs that respond to additional need and ensure funding keeps up with rising inflation.
The additional funding for CCDBG included in the ARA is vital for communities recovering from natural disasters and for the child care sector as a whole, which continues to face the financial challenges of maintaining and building on the positive improvements from the pandemic relief funding. However, the amount allocated is hardly enough to cover the costs of inflation from the previous year.
As concerns about economic recovery, unemployment, and inflation persist, significant and sustained increases in annual discretionary funding remain a critical support. In addition, given the fragile nature of the child care sector caused in part by decades of insufficient federal funding, the need for long-term and sustainable increases for child care remains ever present. More resources for child care and early education are urgently needed. As Congress works to finish the FY25 appropriations process and begins the FY26 appropriations process, federal lawmakers must center the real needs of children, families, and providers in funding decisions.