After days of walkouts on public school campuses across Texas, two state Republican leaders set their sights on a familiar target to rein in the student-led fight against immigration enforcement.

They took aim at the Austin Independent School District. 

In back-to-back announcements, Gov. Greg Abbott ordered the Texas Education Agency to investigate Austin ISD’s role in student protests at more than a dozen campuses. He demanded no such inquiry of any other district where students protested.

Three days later, Attorney General Ken Paxton demanded Austin ISD provide information on attendance, absences, security policies and communications between district staff about the walkouts, accusing the district of facilitating the walkouts. Just like Abbott, Paxton only selected the Austin district for his inquiry. 

Neither official answered any questions from the American-Statesman about why they singled out Austin ISD for investigation, nor have they provided any specific insight on what wrongdoing they suspected occurred. The officials also did not address whether they believe the district’s practices concerning protests are out of step with others.

The outsized attention on Austin ISD’s handling of the protests is the latest example in recent months of Abbott, Paxton and other state conservatives singling out the urban district in a progressive city.

In May, Paxton sued the district over its alleged use of critical race theory in classrooms, but he later dropped the case after officials confirmed they are following state law. A state board of education member in March condemned Austin ISD’s annual celebration of Pride Week, which the district had already scaled back as lawmakers sought to ban pride-related clubs on campuses. In their crusade against diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, conservative lawmakers routinely lambasted the district for its stated values.

While Austin ISD isn’t the only district that state leaders have scrutinized over alleged violations of conservative policies, the latest probes underscore the belief among many advocates and parents that Republicans frequently use the district “as a punching bag,” said Cuitlahuac Guerra-Mojarro, a district parent. 

“Austin ISD seems to be a target of the governor and attorney general for political exploitation,” said Guerra-Mojarro, who is also co-host of the Education X podcast, which examines issues confronting the district. “The headline isn’t as sexy if they investigate Pflugerville ISD. Austin, being the capital of the state, makes it a really easy target.”

Texas education attorney Martin Cirkiel, who has represented students and families on both sides of the political aisle, said: “Why is Austin being singled out? It is obvious. It is political.”

Some district parents and advocates also fear it is the latest effort to build a case toward a state takeover of the district. 

Austin ISD Trustee Kevin Foster said repeated inquiries, lawsuits and investigations have ramifications that ripple throughout the system. 

“Each time an outside agency or an outside organization tells us to respond, they compel us to spend resources,” he said.

Austin ISD faces a $65 million deficit, and any unexpected cost adds to that tally, which has happened several times in the past few years. Foster acknowledged state efforts to hold the district accountable have at times been justified, including in 2023 when TEA investigated chronic failings in the district’s special education department. 

But he said there is a difference between the state’s reasonable scope of powers and when the district appears to be “singled out.”

In the past 10 days, protests like the ones at Austin schools erupted across the state — from San Antonio to Houston. 

Thousands of students carried signs, waved flags and — in Austin — marched to the Texas Capitol to voice outrage over the presence and tactics of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Protests began after the killings of Alex Pretti, Renee Good, Silverio Villegas González and Keith Porter Jr., all civilians who died during encounters with federal agents. 

Students also protested at campuses in Manor, Pflugerville, Leander and Hays school districts. Most demonstrations occurred without incident. Two protests outside of Austin ISD gained attention online — a fight at a protest in Buda resulted in police on Tuesday charging a 45-year-old Kyle man with two counts of assault against student protesters from Johnson High School. Police deemed him the “primary aggressor.” 

Abbott also took notice of Kyle police’s arrest of two minors during student walkouts. Police later clarified the arrests were not related to the protests. One minor was charged with possession of alcohol by a minor, among other things, and the other was charged with resisting arrest and interfering with public duties. 

Online, Abbott insisted that “it’s about time students like this were arrested.” 

“We are also looking into stripping the funding of schools that abandon their duty to teach our kids the curriculum required by law,” he said in a social media post about the incident. 

Largely, recent student protests against ICE have been peaceful. 

Over the past half-century, federal law gave special consideration to students’ ability to demonstrate.

A 1969 U.S. Supreme Court case solidified grade-school students’ right to protest during the school day — unless demonstrators disrupt learning. 

“Basically, the thing is, as long as they’re not disrupting school, the school board can’t thwart the First Amendment rights to protest,” Cirkiel said. 

However, under state law, teachers aren’t allowed to encourage students to protest on a particular issue or share their political views in class. They can be punished for doing so. This week, Hays CISD placed a teacher on administrative leave after photos circulated online of him holding profane protest signs while on campus

“These dedicated staff members are not politicians,” Hays Superintendent Eric Wright wrote in a Feb. 2 letter to families. “They have no need for and don’t seek votes or campaign contributions; nor are they ever up for election.” 

Consistent with state law, Austin ISD prohibits employees from encouraging walkouts or protests, spokesman JJ Maldonado said. Campus leadership provides guidance to staff on maintaining professional boundaries, he said, and staff’s role is to inform students of consequences for leaving class. 

Guerra-Mojarro said Austin teachers are particularly cautious about their political behavior in the current climate.

“Over the last decade, teachers’ personal opinion has been chilled,” he said. 

However, Brian Phillips, spokesman for conservative think tank Texas Public Policy Foundation, believes both investigations will unearth wrongdoing on the part of Austin ISD and educators. 

Austin ISD’s actions specifically “appalled” him because he felt punishments for students leaving class — an unexcused absence — weren’t harsh enough, he said. 

“Did their parents even know they were walking up Congress?” Phillips said. “Where were the teachers? Did the teachers let them out of class?” 

He pointed to a post-walkout announcement from Hays CISD that warned students they’d face Saturday school detention and lose final exam exemption privileges if they become truant as a more appropriate response to the demonstrations. According to state law, students become truant when they miss 10 days in six months. 

Abbott’s original call to investigate Austin ISD referred to a social media post by Phillips with photos of AISD police vehicles near student protestors on Congress Avenue.

Austin ISD Superintendent Matias Segura has said the district didn’t promote the recent protests, but campuses directed district police to be present to ensure students remained safe. 

According to district policy, administrators may prohibit student expression if it interferes with school activities or the rights of other students or teachers. The district communicates with parents about walkouts if officials learn of them in advance and always wants students in the classroom during school hours, Segura said. 

“During the school day, our students are our responsibility and we’re committed to the safety of our students in our community, regardless if they are on our campus,” Segura said in a letter to parents. 

While walkouts aren’t a perpetual event on campuses, it’s not uncommon for students in Austin ISD or other districts to protest local or national issues.

In 2018, students across the nation walked out of class in response to the Parkland High School shooting earlier that year that resulted in the death of 17 students and teachers. Following those walkouts, Abbott directed the TEA to ensure districts took steps to protect students from shootings. 

But the tradition runs deeper: In 1968, students walked out to protest the Vietnam War, poverty and racial discrimination within the schooling system, including in San Antonio. Some of these protests played a role in policy changes, including the walkouts in San Antonio’s Edgewood ISD, which helped spark changes in the state’s public school funding system.

Students also walk out of class in Austin ISD to voice their unique concerns. In past practice, district officials say staff have supervised walkouts, even those that are relatively small, which students have staged on issues like abortion rights or potential school closings. 

For these past protests, district officials say they marked students leaving class with an unexcused absence. AISD maintains rules about truancy that apply to protest-related absences: multiple absences can put a students’ final grade in jeopardy or even prevent a student from getting credit, according to district policy. Unless given special accommodations, students must attend 90% of a class to receive credit, according to district policy.  

Although the investigations appear focused on Austin ISD, debate over a school’s proper response to protests has triggered significant statewide response. The TEA confirmed it launched investigations of other districts, but did not say which ones. Meanwhile, some districts ratcheted up consequences for students leaving school to attend demonstrations. 

On Tuesday, the TEA told districts that the state could sanction educators who help students leave class for political activism and impose harsh consequences  against school districts that don’t follow state attendance requirements. TEA even threatened districts with the most severe repercussion the agency has available — a state takeover.

But Texas doesn’t have jurisdiction over how local school districts punish students who skip class as long as each district is consistent in its punishment, no matter the reason for a student’s absence, said Kevin O’Hanlon, an Austin attorney who specializes in education law. 

The state could investigate whether a district had given harsher or more lenient punishment to protesting students compared to other unexcused absences unrelated to protests, he said. “It’s based on their conduct, not on their speech,” O’Hanlon said. 

As a parent of high schoolers, Laurie Solis is disappointed but not surprised by Abbott and Paxton’s focus on Austin ISD. 

“I really hate that Gov. Abbott is using the federal tactics at play, which is threatening our people on whatever they feel like is an opening or an exposure,” Solis said. “Austin ISD is not the only district where students were using their First Amendment rights to protest.”