In the community of Woodburn, Oregon, a growing sense of unease over federal immigration enforcement has been sharply intensified by two recent fatal shootings involving federal officers hundreds of miles away in Minneapolis. This profound anxiety has galvanized local educators, transforming their grief into a determined push for the school district to reinforce its protective policies. The prevailing belief among residents is that the existing safeguards, which were designed to shield students and their families from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activities, are now critically inadequate in the face of what many perceive as increasingly aggressive and unpredictable federal tactics. The community’s collective mourning has quickly evolved into a focused campaign for reform, igniting a vital local debate over the fundamental question of whether their schools can truly be considered safe havens. This movement highlights a deep-seated fear that without immediate and decisive action, the sanctity of their educational institutions could be irrevocably compromised.
A Distant Tragedy Hits Close to Home
The primary catalyst for Woodburn’s recent activism was a pair of violent incidents that, despite their geographic distance, struck a chord of fear within the community. On the evening of January 27, a group of approximately 40 local educators and residents convened for a vigil, mourning the death of Alex Pretti, who had been killed by federal agents in Minneapolis just three days prior. This tragic event came on the heels of another fatal shooting by federal officers on January 7, when Renee Good was killed less than two miles from where Pretti died. For many in Woodburn, these back-to-back killings were not isolated news stories but alarming indicators of a potential threat much closer to home. Max Sanchez, the vigil’s organizer, encapsulated the community’s sentiment by labeling the deaths as “senseless acts of violence.” Yet, amid the sorrow, Sanchez also pointed to the unified public response as a source of hope, suggesting that collective action could be a powerful countermeasure to the perceived escalation of force by federal authorities. The vigil served as both a memorial and a rallying cry for a community feeling increasingly vulnerable.
This pervasive anxiety is not merely a hypothetical reaction to events elsewhere; it is firmly grounded in the local reality of ongoing immigration enforcement. Data from the Portland Immigration Rights Coalition indicated that ICE had detained roughly 1,051 individuals across Oregon between late June and December of the previous year. While specific numbers for Woodburn remain unknown, the school district has confirmed that parents and other family members of its students have been among those detained by federal agents. This has cultivated a persistent atmosphere of trauma and uncertainty, which the recent news from Minneapolis has severely exacerbated. At the community gathering, district educator Sherrilynn Rawson-Ybarra voiced a common feeling, describing the situation as a “tremendous overreach by the government” that she believes is both “illegal and unconstitutional.” Her call for residents to “stand in solidarity to say that enough is enough” resonated deeply. Another attendee, Linda Wilmes-Smith, argued that the issue transcends political divisions, framing it as a matter of “basic moral values and ethics” and a fundamental need to support the most vulnerable members of their community.
From Vigil to Action Demanding Stronger School Policies
Immediately following the solemn vigil, the community’s focus shifted from mourning to direct action, with many of the educators proceeding to the Woodburn School District’s board meeting. Their mission was to advocate for stronger protections, arguing that the district’s current “Safe and Welcoming Schools Resolution” is no longer sufficient. This resolution, originally adopted in April 2025 and reaffirmed in November, was crafted to align with Oregon’s sanctuary laws and reassure families that schools are protected zones. Its key provisions stipulate that federal agents are not permitted to access school property beyond the main office and are prohibited from removing a student without a judicial order. While once seen as a robust safeguard, educators now view this policy as dangerously flawed and based on an assumption that has been proven false. Max Sanchez articulated this concern before the board, stating that the policy operates on the misguided premise that “ICE will follow the law.” He warned of an emerging and “troubling new trend” where students are becoming direct targets, undermining the very concept of schools as safe spaces. Teacher Ella Johansen highlighted a specific logistical loophole, explaining that directing agents to the main office is problematic because, in many school layouts, the office provides a direct gateway to the rest of the building, thereby failing to secure the safety of students and staff inside.
To illustrate the severe potential consequences of these policy gaps, the educators cited a recent incident at Roosevelt High School in Minneapolis as a stark cautionary tale. According to reports, ICE agents entered school grounds during dismissal, detained educators, and even exposed students to tear gas. This event provided a concrete example of the aggressive enforcement tactics that Woodburn educators fear could be replicated in their own district. In response, they presented the school board with a set of specific, actionable demands to fortify the district’s resolution. Their proposals included requiring school administrators to meet any federal agents outside the school building, explicitly prohibiting entry onto any part of the campus without a judicial warrant, and mandating the immediate implementation of lockdown procedures whenever ICE agents are reported on or near school property. Tony Salm, an educator and leader in the teachers union, underscored the critical nature of these changes. He asserted that it was “vital that our schools, including its offices, will remain as safe and welcoming spaces — in short — as sanctuaries.” This unified plea represented a clear consensus among the educators: the definition of a “sanctuary” had to be reinforced with practical, preventative measures that left no room for ambiguity or exploitation.
