The Oakland University Student Congress adopted a resolution encouraging the university to limit cooperation with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), citing concerns over student safety, due process and transparency amid a national climate that has left some students feeling fearful and uncertain.
The resolution, C.R. 68-08, calls on Oakland University to protect student data, restrict cooperation with ICE, unless required by a court order, and continue providing support for international students and those from immigrant families. While the resolution cannot mandate university action, it formally states the position of the student government and urges consideration from university leadership.
Following the rise of ICE’s presence and violence-related incidents across the country, OUSC has developed a “statement of values and expectations” reaffirming that students, especially those who are international and immigrants, can confidently feel that they are safe and protected on campus— not in a constant state of “intimidation or fear.”
Student Body President Marcus Johnson said the resolution was driven by concerns raised by students before the start of the semester. He said fear and uncertainty had become recurring themes in conversations with students across campus.
He also discussed his main goals and possible outlooks for passing this resolution. Overall, he and student congress have expressed their solidarity with immigrant students, disapproves of the cancellation of student visas without due process and they have made it clear they will not be cooperating with ICE or any other agency “seeking to harass or deport students unless legally compelled by a court order.”
“One of the most consistent concerns we’ve heard from students, particularly international students and students from immigrant families, has been fear and uncertainty around their safety and status,” Johnson said in an interview with The Oakland Post. “Even when enforcement actions are not directly happening on our campus, the national climate has real, tangible impacts on students’ mental health, academic performance and sense of belonging.”
Johnson said those concerns led students to question whether the university would advocate for them during moments of uncertainty. He said the resolution was meant to address that question directly.
“The resolution reflects Student Congress responding to students who were asking a simple question: ‘Is my university willing to stand up for me?’” Johnson said.
The resolution urges the university administration to do whatever they can to protect students through legal action, if possible, and ensure that international students affected can still continue their education with the University and to continue their support through offices such as the International Students and Scholars office and the Provost’s Office.
“The resolution does not claim that the university can unilaterally prevent ICE from entering campus, but it does outline what the institution can and should do within the bounds of the law to minimize harm and fear,” Johnson said.
Johnson also addressed his framework for how he will navigate protecting students through legal, rather than symbolic, action. The resolution includes limiting cooperation with federal agencies without the presence of a court order, securing student data, working with existing administrations such as the Strategic Response Team and ensuring that students who are affected within reasons out of their control are not academically penalized.
The Strategic Response Team (SRT) was established in the beginning of last year by University President Ora Hirsch Pescovitz that aims to navigate and establish “proactive strategies” to ensure student success, research, teaching, community engagement and DEI and transgender rights as universities face changes under the Trump administration. They inform the OU community about upcoming changes expected by executive orders and the most rational and ethical actions that should be taken as a result of said order.
According to Johnson, the resolution was not drafted in response to a single incident but rather a broader pattern of developments. He referenced reports of ICE activity near educational institutions, revocation of student visas without clear due process and outreach from students seeking reassurance. Johnson said OUSC began working on the resolution during the summer term, and it was developed through collaboration, open debate and a formal vote consistent with standard OUSC procedure.
“The main goal of the resolution is to clearly state that student safety, due process and institutional transparency should be prioritized,” Johnson said. “Oakland University should not be a passive or willing participant in actions that place students in harm’s way.”
“In terms of navigating this with the administration and the broader student body, my approach has been to balance transparency with realism. I have been clear with students about the limits of student government authority while also pushing the administration to be proactive, communicative and student-centered. With administration, the focus has been on dialogue, policy clarity and ensuring that there are established protocols rather than ad hoc reactions if federal agents were to appear on campus,” Johnson said.
Johnson also referenced a quote from Martin Luther King Jr., saying, “In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.” He added that interpretations of such statements remain subjective, noting that opinions and perspectives can vary.
The passage of the resolution followed a public statement released earlier in the week by OUSC on social media. The statement framed immigration enforcement as a moral and humanitarian issue rather than a political debate and emphasized solidarity with students and families affected by immigration enforcement. It was posted ahead of a protest organized by Young Democratic Socialists of Oakland University.
Johnson said both the statement and the resolution were intended to clarify OUSC’s values and reassure students. He also said the resolution outlines plans for OUSC to meet with Oakland University Police Department leadership to discuss protocols related to federal immigration enforcement.
“Our role would be to ask questions, understand existing policies and advocate for clear guidelines that prioritize student safety while respecting the law,” Johnson said. “The goal is transparency and preparedness, not unrealistic promises.”
And in all truth and honesty, as Johnson had said just now, there are limits to what he and campus administration may wish to do. Universities have been facing funding threats from the Trump administration for a variety of reasons—such funding cuts over alleged acts of antisemitism and cuts over universities failing to comply with the Diversity, Inclusion and Equity (DEI) cuts— since he took office at the beginning of last year.
Campus administration and OUSC face the battle of not being able to legally prohibit ICE from campus. Oakland is a public university, meaning that federal officers can enter the non-private premise without warrant, but if they wish to access nonpublic areas on campus, then that requires the approval from the campus administration. With that being said, Oakland University will do their best to protect students while also lawfully obliging to federal orders.
Johnson acknowledged that not all students agree with the resolution, but said disagreement is a normal part of campus discourse.
“Oakland operates within a system where funding, compliance expectations and political scrutiny are real constraints, and I do not discount the risks institutions face when speaking out or taking firm stances. Acknowledging those constraints, however, does not absolve the University of its responsibility to prioritize student safety, due process, and transparency. The resolution is deliberately written to push for action that is lawful, measured and defensible, rather than reckless, while still making clear that student well-being must remain the guiding principle,” Johnson said.
“This resolution is not about partisan politics,” Johnson continued. “It’s about whether students deserve to feel safe, supported and treated with dignity while pursuing their education. Even students who disagree with the framing should be able to agree that fear and uncertainty should not be barriers to learning.”
As a formal statement, the resolution places OUSC’s position on record while encouraging continued dialogue between students and university leadership.
“Ultimately, the resolution is about setting expectations and drawing lines,” Johnson said in his final remark. “While no resolution can physically bar ICE from campus, it can make clear that Oakland University will not be a willing participant in enforcement actions that undermine student safety, due process or trust. That clarity matters, both for institutional accountability and for students who need to know where their university stands.
