[ad_1]
In a key victory for immigration rights groups, the California Court of Appeals found that the University of California did not provide sufficient legal basis to justify its “discriminatory policies,” except for the employment of undocumented students from on-campus jobs.
UCLA graduates and lecturers filed a lawsuit in October alleging that the UC system’s employment policy violates state law because it discriminates against students based on immigration circumstances.
The plaintiff said many undocumented students have struggled to meet tuition fees and cover basic needs such as housing and food without access to campus work. These students are often forced into the underground economy and miss out on opportunities to promote careers, such as research assistant positions.
The attorneys representing the UC system argued that employing undocumented students would violate federal laws that prohibit the employment of people without legal status and could lead to federal retaliation.
However, a three-person review board determined that the system’s policies violate California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act, and that the fear of federal lawsuits is not sufficiently grounded to maintain it.
“The University does not argue that it relies on federal law or regulatory requirements when deciding not to amend policies, only to risks associated with adopting policies that the federal government may consider illegal,” the ruling states. “We therefore conclude that the university has abused its discretion by relying on inappropriate justifications to continue to apply facial discriminatory policies.”
The panel has suspended the ruling that UC must overturn the policy. Rather, it ordered the university system to reconsider its policies based on appropriate legal standards.
The lawyers representing the plaintiffs consider the verdict a victory and are calling for students who have not been documented in UC to open their jobs.
“The strong court’s opinion rejects UC’s attempt to justify policies that discriminate against undocumented students. This is wrong to prohibit, morally and legally, the state’s most talented students from accessing important educational and employment opportunities based on immigration circumstances. “We call on UC to comply with state laws and treat all students equally, regardless of their status of immigration.”
The UC system said it is considering a court decision but has not commented on whether to change employment policies.
“As long as it complies with the law, the university continues to believe that undocumented students deserve the same opportunity as other students,” UC spokesman Stett Holbrook said in a statement.
University officials have previously expressed fear that changing the system’s employment policies could result in potential losses of civil fines, criminal penalties and billions of dollars in federal funds. Last week, the Trump administration announced it would freeze hundreds of millions of dollars in federal research funding to UCLA, citing concerns over anti-Semitism and university handling of pro-Palestinian protests.
The court’s ruling on Tuesday comes after years of push to open campus jobs to students without documentaries.
The debate on whether it is legal to do so revolves around the Immigration Reform Act of 1986, banning the employment of people without legal status.
The plaintiffs in the suit alleges that the federal law does not apply to government employers such as the UC system. The lawyer representing UC did not argue that the IRCA would apply to public universities, but the federal government may believe it.
In Tuesday’s ruling, a three-judicial panel noted that UC has the option to file a lawsuit against the federal government to secure a court ruling on whether the university system is subject to the IRCA.
Under Obama-era postponement measures, the Children’s Arrival Policy – better known as the DACA – is an undocumented youth whose children were brought to the United States to obtain work permits. The UC system allows for the employment of undocumented students with work permits.
However, President Trump ended the DACA program in 2017, and the court challenged the decision, but the program no longer accepts new applicants.
Currently, there are approximately 64,300 undocumented college students who are not eligible for work permits or campus jobs because they are not eligible for California DACA.
“As an undocumented and UC lecturer, I know first hand the transformative power of work opportunities on campus,” plaintiff Iliana G. Perez said in a statement on the court’s ruling. “UC must now dismantle exclusive policies and act urgently to ensure that all students, regardless of the immigration situation, are fully involved in education, contribute to campus, and shape California’s future.”
Students and faculty have begun advocating for the UC system to open jobs to all students regardless of the immigration situation in 2022.
UC Regent established a working group in 2023 to consider changes to its employment policy, but the group suspended its work for fear of violating the IRCA.
A year later, the California Legislature passed all legal opportunities and called for state public universities to open employment for all students, but Newsom rejected the bill citing legal concerns about the IRCA.
This led the plaintiffs to file a lawsuit in October 2024 seeking a mandate requesting that the UC system consider undocumented students for on-campus work. The court initially rejected the request, but the plaintiff appealed the decision to the California Supreme Court, and then ordered the Court of Appeal to govern the merits of the suit. The appeals court heard oral debate in May and issued its ruling on Tuesday.
[ad_2]Source link
