Internal district records obtained by a conservative legal group say Flagstaff Unified School District staff knew about and, in some cases, helped manage a student walkout protesting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, leaving parents furious that kids were allowed off campus without clear parental consent.
Hundreds of middle and high school students left classes on Jan. 28 to protest ICE, and the fallout has been loud and immediate. Parents complained they were not informed that their children were permitted to leave school grounds, and some said they felt blindsided and unsafe. One parent summed up that sense of betrayal bluntly when they wrote, “the district failed us as parents.”
Documents pulled by America First Legal show staff were aware of the planned event days ahead and were in touch with students about logistics. A message captured from a staff text group bluntly read, “We have 75 plus students staged outside of fhs [Flagstaff High School] getting ready to walk.” The same staff message also noted, “Looks like we have some members of the public joining.”
Staff texts also flagged security concerns, including warnings about how doors were being handled on campus. One message cautioned, “Be aware of propped open doors that are left for reentry.” Those snippets raise questions about whether normal access controls and supervision were temporarily relaxed during the demonstration.
The district pushed back in a statement, saying, “We respectfully disagree that the Flagstaff Unified School District encouraged students to attend or intentionally ignored District policies.” Officials also told critics, “The District was placed in the challenging position of balancing students’ First Amendment rights, student safety and school operations in the most appropriate way it could.”
Written policy language cited in the records stresses clear responsibilities for campus access and attendance. The policy notes that “the Superintendent shall limit access to school buildings and grounds” and that faculty “maintain protocols regarding the distribution of keys or equipment to access District property.” It also reiterates attendance rules, saying students ages six to 16 are “required to attend school during the school’s hours” and that “the school in which the student is enrolled shall make a reasonable effort to promptly telephone and notify the parent/legal guardian or other person who has custody of the student of the student’s absence from school.”
A student email to then-Flagstaff High School Principal Tadd Ragan shows students asked for guidance about the protest and where to gather, telling Ragan they planned to walk out “near a main road for more recognition” and asking for advice “in finding a more organized way of going about this.” Ragan replied that “as a District and School we have a plan to maintain a peaceful protest” and later asked, “Can you come by my office during first period?”
An instructional coach, Janet Chavez-Vesely, emailed administrators saying she had talked with the Hispanic Culture Club while staying neutral, writing she “stayed neutral and answered questions while they planned.” She also said a student “plans to stop by and see me” and offered help, “I am available to support supervision,” adding, “just let me know where.”
Some parents notified the district they would keep kids home rather than risk exposure to the protest. One parent emailed the principal, “I am keeping my daughter home from school this Wednesday as it has been brought to my attention that both Flagstaff high school and Coconino high school have planned out an entire protest.” Another parent wrote, “My kids will not be at school tomorrow,” explaining, “This is not something that I want my children exposed to or involved in as situations like this in the past have become violent and unsafe.”
At least one staffer sounded almost gleeful in internal messages, texting, “This Walk out thing is going to be FUN!” Meanwhile, Sinagua Middle School Principal Christopher Koenker emailed staff that the district “supports our students’ constitutional rights to peaceful assembly and free expression and is aware of student-led events planned.” He also said schools would “neither encourage nor discourage student participation” and the district sought extra staff and law enforcement “for protection and supervision, not to suppress student expression.”
Post-event notes include a blunt internal reminder that “school isn’t responsible for students’ safety after they leave campus.” A debrief also described a teacher, identified as “Ms. Donovan,” who took a class outside to watch the walkout and later discussed ICE operations, allegedly telling students officers had “used” a five-year-old “to lure the family out to take him.” Administrators worried it “might appear that she was influencing them to be outside” and recorded that Donovan “congratulated them,” saying, “Great job for standing up for your first amendment rights.”
Parents told raw, scared stories in messages to administrators, with one mother saying she and her husband “were terrified that our daughter was peer pressured (by friends, classmates, teachers, and the school district) to be a part of this.” She added, “We’re thankful that our daughter remained at school, due to fear and frustration, but there is still the ‘what if’? What if something happened to any students during the walkout?” and pressed, “We expect the district to be transparent and not jeopardize our children’s safety.”
Another parent said their child “was under the impression this was a school sponsored event,” and demanded accountability, writing, “This school district has broken my trust and neglected your responsibilities and disregard for your own policies.” That sense of broken trust is the theme America First Legal’s James Rogers underscored when he said, “What these documents show is a stunning betrayal of that trust.” He concluded, “Parents deserved to know where their children were. The law required these officials to act, and they failed on both counts.”
