Texas Governor-elect Gina Hinojosa has outlined plans to end all state-level immigration enforcement cooperation with federal authorities and expand school choice options for parents, marking a significant departure from recent Republican-led policies in the state. The announcements follow her victory in the November election, positioning her to take office in January.
Hinojosa’s transition team confirmed in a statement that she intends to cease cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other federal agencies on immigration enforcement matters. The policy shift would align with broader Democratic efforts to limit local law enforcement’s role in federal immigration actions. In a separate policy statement, Hinojosa also pledged to roll back restrictions on school choice programs, allowing parents greater autonomy in selecting educational institutions for their children.
Legal and Political Constraints on Policy Changes
While Hinojosa’s proposals signal a shift in direction, experts note that state-level changes face significant hurdles. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican, has previously filed lawsuits challenging local sanctuary policies, arguing they violate federal law. Additionally, the state legislature, where Republicans hold a majority in both chambers, would need to approve any major policy reversals. Federal immigration enforcement remains under the jurisdiction of U.S. agencies, meaning local cooperation is voluntary in many cases.
In an interview with Newsweek, Hinojosa emphasized the need for balanced border security, distinguishing between recent illegal crossings and long-term residents without legal status. “Many Texans come from mixed-status families, and there is a lot of fear in our communities right now that our families are under attack,” she stated. “We all want border security, but this is not that. This is making us less safe, and it needs to stop.”
Opposition and Advocacy Groups Weigh In
Critics of Hinojosa’s immigration stance argue that reduced cooperation with ICE could hinder federal enforcement efforts and potentially allow undocumented individuals with criminal records to evade deportation. Sheriffs in border counties, many of whom have historically supported Republican-led enforcement policies, have expressed concerns about the impact on local safety. “If we stop working with ICE, we lose a critical tool for keeping our communities safe,” said Hidalgo County Sheriff Eddie Guerra, a Democrat who has previously collaborated with federal immigration authorities.
Advocacy groups, however, argue that sanctuary-like policies foster trust between immigrant communities and local law enforcement, encouraging crime reporting and community engagement. “When people fear deportation, they won’t come forward to report crimes or testify in court,” said Manny Garcia, executive director of Texas Rising, a progressive advocacy organization. “This is about public safety, not politics.”
Education Policy: Expanding School Choice
Hinojosa’s education proposals would reverse recent restrictions on charter schools and voucher programs, which were expanded under Republican leadership in the past decade. Supporters of school choice, including Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, have framed the restrictions as necessary to maintain accountability in public education. “Parents deserve options, but we must ensure those options meet high standards,” Patrick stated in a recent press conference.
Opponents, including public school advocates, argue that expanding charter schools could divert funding from traditional public schools, exacerbating disparities in education quality. “This is a privatization scheme that benefits wealthy families at the expense of our most vulnerable students,” said Texas State Teachers Association President Zeph Capo.
Long-Term Implications for Texas and National Politics
If implemented, Hinojosa’s policies could reshape Texas’ role in national immigration debates, where the state has been a leading advocate for strict enforcement. Her education proposals could also influence other states considering similar policy shifts. Political analysts suggest that her administration’s approach may galvanize both supporters and opponents, potentially shaping future electoral dynamics in Texas and beyond.
Legal experts caution that any unilateral changes to immigration enforcement could face immediate legal challenges, given Texas’ history of high-stakes litigation over immigration policies. The state’s 2017 “sanctuary cities” ban, which penalized local governments for limiting ICE cooperation, remains in effect and could be used to block Hinojosa’s proposals.
As Hinojosa prepares to take office, the scope and speed of her policy changes will depend on negotiations with the legislature, the courts, and federal authorities—factors that could delay or reshape her agenda before it takes full effect.