Why Thousands of Students Walked Out: Interviews from LA, Houston, Portland
Thousands of students walked out of schools across Los Angeles, Houston, Portland, and dozens of other cities in late January and early February 2026. They weren’t protesting a new policy or a gradual shift in enforcement—they were responding to two fatal shootings by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis within seventeen days.
The walkouts represented some of the largest youth-led protests in recent American history, rivaling the scale of the 2018 gun control protests. Students organized through Instagram accounts and group chats, coordinating their departures despite explicit threats of suspension, state investigations, and potential loss of school funding.
What Happened in Minneapolis
On January 7, 2026, Renée Nicole Macklin Good was shot and killed by an ICE agent in Minneapolis. Good, a 37-year-old U.S. citizen and mother of three, had been watching and documenting what ICE agents were doing near schools where parents were dropping off children.
According to eyewitness accounts and Minnesota officials, Good was in her car, stopped sideways across the street, when agent Jonathan Ross approached and fired multiple times. She sustained gunshot wounds to the chest, forearm, and head. The Department of Homeland Security claimed Good had been “stalking and impeding ICE all day” and posed a threat to officers. Video footage released afterward didn’t match that description.
Seventeen days later, on January 24, Alex Jeffrey Pretti was killed by Customs and Border Protection agents in the same city. Pretti, a 37-year-old ICU nurse at the Department of Veterans Affairs, was observing and attempting to direct traffic during an ICE operation when agents opened fire.
A physician who arrived at the scene later wrote in court documents that officers appeared to be “counting bullet holes rather than providing first aid.” Pretti had at least three gunshot wounds to the back, one to the upper-left chest, and possibly one to the neck. The Department of Homeland Security maintained Pretti had attempted to assault officers. Video evidence contradicted the official account.
These shootings occurred during Operation Metro Surge, which the Department of Homeland Security described as the largest immigration enforcement operation ever conducted. Between early December 2025 and late January 2026, approximately 2,000 to 3,000 federal agents deployed to Minneapolis-Saint Paul, resulting in roughly 3,000 arrests. The operation had led to daily protests, school closures, and what Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey called an “impossible situation.”
Los Angeles: 4,500 Students Converge Downtown
Matthew, a junior at Lincoln High School in Los Angeles, created an Instagram account—@lausdwalkouts2026—to coordinate what would become one of the largest demonstrations in the city’s recent history.
“I was inspired by last year’s protests and family members who have been afraid to leave their homes or go to the supermarket,” Matthew told reporters. The account provided guidance on public transportation routes, safety protocols, and the specific demands organizers were making.
On January 30, 2026, approximately 4,500 students from roughly two dozen schools participated in a coordinated walkout. Young people from diverse campuses across the city left during different periods, meeting at transit stations and traveling together downtown.
The march converged at Los Angeles City Hall around noon. Hundreds carried signs reading “Being human isn’t criminal,” “No human is illegal on stolen land,” “Hot people melt ICE,” and “We’re skipping our lesson to teach you one.”
They marched to the Metropolitan Detention Center and through Little Tokyo, staying in the streets for hours. Around 3:30 p.m., Los Angeles police ordered the crowd to disperse. The following morning, five people had been arrested—four juveniles for suspected vandalism and one adult for suspected battery on a police officer.
The vandalism included anti-ICE tagging sprayed in red, white, and blue paint onto the Japanese American National Museum, a building housing artifacts from the forced incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War II.
Matthew explained his motivation: “It felt important because I was speaking out for those that don’t have a voice.”
Houston: Dozens of Walkouts Across the Metro Area
On February 6, 2026, more than six dozen walkouts occurred at schools across the Houston area—from Kingwood to Spring to Alief.
At Elsick High School in Alief, hundreds filled the streets carrying posters and flags. Many held signs stating “No more ICE” and “Abolish ICE.” Young people from Cypress Falls High School, Marshall High School, and other area schools left campus during lunch periods and after-school hours.
They did this despite explicit warnings from district administrators that they’d be marked absent and potentially face disciplinary consequences. Some carried Mexican flags while others held signs echoing the Los Angeles protesters: “We’re skipping our lesson to teach you one.”
One participant referenced Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s threats: “If Abbott does something against them, there’s going to be a couple of lawsuits that are going to be filed.”
The Houston demonstrations showed defiance—walking out in a state where officials had explicitly threatened to investigate schools and revoke educator licenses for facilitating protests.
Portland: The Latino Student Union Leads the March
The demonstration in Portland took a different organizational form. The Latino Student Union at David Douglas High School—one of Oregon’s largest schools where more than one-third identify as Latino—led a coordinated walkout during school hours on February 6.
Young people from David Douglas and the nearby alternative school, Fir Ridge, marched through Southeast Portland streets carrying whistles, Mexican flags, and creative signs. Adults and community members wore safety vests to help guide traffic along the march route.
David Douglas school board member Thomas Stephenson joined the protest, holding a sign reading “people are not illegal.” He later stated: “I’m hoping that these students, our future voters, our future leaders, that they’ll be able to—even though they can’t vote—they’re out here making a point.”
The flyer for the walkout noted that participants wouldn’t be punished, indicating working with school administrators ahead of time. This represented a stark contrast to the situation in Texas and Florida, where they faced explicit threats.
Florida and Maryland: Walking Out Despite Suspension Threats
In Brevard, Florida, dozens at three high schools—Viera, Rockledge, and Satellite—walked out despite explicit threats from the School Board Chair that they could be suspended.
Layla, a senior at Viera High School and daughter of an immigrant, explained her motivation: “My father is an immigrant, and a lot of my family is immigrants, and I love them so much, and I don’t think that anyone, despite how they got here, if they were born here or not, deserves the treatment that immigrants are getting from ICE right now.”
At Satellite High School, Loren addressed the administration’s attempts to prevent the walkout: “There’s so many Hispanic people at our school that are afraid, and it’s ridiculous what’s happening. There’s no reason for it, and there’s no reason to stop us from coming out here, other than you disagree.”
In Maryland, young people at Perry Hall High School and Baltimore City College organized their own demonstrations. Perry Hall senior Nihal Ali stated: “I see how ICE has been affecting our communities, and how much families are hurting over this.”
Baltimore City College participants, organizing through Students Organizing a Multicultural Open Society (SOMOS), marched from their temporary classroom location at the University of Baltimore campus to Pearlstone Park, chanting “Cuidado con el hielo” (Watch out with ICE).
Dylan Rooks observed: “Different classes, all over, from different religions, races, they’re fighting all as one, and we’re coming together as one to fight for our rights.”
Texas Threatens Schools
On January 30, Governor Greg Abbott issued a directive to investigate walkouts in Austin Independent School District. His statement put it bluntly: “AISD gets taxpayer dollars to teach the subjects required by the state, not to help students skip school to protest. Our schools are for educating our children, not political indoctrination.”
Three days later, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton increased the pressure, demanding information from Austin ISD about the district’s involvement in facilitating walkouts. Paxton characterized the protests as a “protest field trip designed to villify brave law enforcement officials protecting our country.”
On February 3, the Texas Education Agency released formal guidance establishing explicit consequences. Schools would lose daily attendance funding for students marked absent. Teachers organizing or encouraging walkouts would face investigation and potential license revocation. School districts facilitating walkouts would be subject to investigation and potential sanctions, including “the appointment of a monitor, conservator or board of managers”—state takeover.
Despite these threats, Austin ISD Superintendent Matias Segura issued a statement clarifying that the district didn’t “sponsor or endorse” the walkouts but acknowledged that “staff cannot physically prevent a student from choosing to leave campus.” District police remained present during protests to ensure safety—a decision that prompted Abbott to demand investigation into whether the district was facilitating rather than preventing the demonstrations.
Los Angeles Unified School District took a different approach, issuing a statement supporting “the rights of our students to advocate for causes important to them” while expressing concerns about safety at off-campus demonstrations.
The 1968 Chicano Blowouts
The East Los Angeles Walkouts of 1968, known as the Chicano Blowouts, provide a direct parallel. Between March 1 and March 8, 1968, approximately 15,000 to 20,000 walked out of seven Los Angeles high schools—Wilson, Garfield, Roosevelt, Lincoln, Belmont, Jefferson, and Venice.
They protested unfair treatment built into the school system: overcrowded classrooms, outdated textbooks, lack of academic counseling, widespread discouragement from pursuing college, and prohibition of Spanish language use. The walkouts represented the first major mass protest against racism undertaken by Mexican-Americans in United States history.
Both protests were organized by young people themselves with support from community leaders and sympathetic teachers. Both were deliberately structured, with coordinated chants, prepared signs, and public lists of demands. Both occurred in Los Angeles and involved predominantly Latino schools. Both drew police response and generated legal consequences for organizers.
The school board initially denied all demands, citing lack of funding. The subsequent arrest of organizers shifted the movement’s focus from policy demands to legal defense, fragmenting the effort.
Yet the 1968 walkouts did produce lasting change. After months of sit-ins and community demonstrations, the board eventually implemented some demanded reforms. The walkouts sparked the Chicano civil rights movement in Los Angeles and contributed to the development of Chicano studies programs, bilingual education, and increased Mexican American political representation that extended across decades.
What the Students Accomplished
The protests succeeded in generating substantial media coverage across national and local outlets. The size and scope of participation—thousands simultaneously leaving schools in multiple states—created images that were hard to ignore. Creative protest signage generated social media engagement and showed smart political thinking.
The demonstrations drew attention to the deaths of Renée Good and Alex Pretti and the broader crisis of ICE enforcement. Among activists and organizers, the walkouts strengthened the message that ICE operations had become unacceptable.
The aggressive investigation threats from Texas officials revealed that political opponents took the mobilization seriously enough to spend time and money stopping future protests. This response suggests the protests succeeded in interfering with how schools normally work and creating political costs for officials.
However, neither the Trump administration nor Congress moved to curtail ICE operations in response to the walkouts. The federal government maintained that Good and Pretti were threats who had posed dangers to officers, contradicting eyewitness accounts and video evidence but maintaining the official position despite protests.
Immigration enforcement falls under federal control, and federal ICE operations can’t be halted by state or local protest, regardless of scale. Changing federal policy would require Congressional action or executive order reversal, both of which require political conditions unlikely to emerge from protest alone.
The one-day nature of the initial walkouts limited how much disruption they could cause. Research shows that continued disruption that creates problems for authorities tends to produce policy change. Single-day actions, regardless of scale, typically generate less pressure for institutional change than sustained campaigns.
The Students’ Strategy
The primary stated goal wasn’t to immediately halt ICE operations through protest pressure—an unrealistic expectation given federal control. Rather, organizers stated immediate goals of publicly showing they cared about the deaths of Good and Pretti, showing the community rejected immigration enforcement policies, and giving immigrant students and families strength and confidence by showing visible support.
Tylea Booker of SOMOS in Baltimore captured this framing: “I fully believe that this is making a difference, no matter how small. You are wanted, you are a full part of this community, no matter how old, young, age, ability, class, whatever, however you identify, you are here because you belong here.”
For immigrant communities experiencing fear and surveillance from federal enforcement, visible youth support communicated affirmation and belonging.
Organizers also stated medium-term goals of shifting public opinion and establishing immigration enforcement as a central political issue in 2026 midterm elections. Matthew from Lincoln High School stated: “I want people to go out and vote for midterms, pre-register to vote.”
The timing of the walkouts—in early 2026, with midterm elections anticipated later in the year—showed they were trying to affect election results. By generating media coverage and demonstrating youthful opposition to immigration enforcement, organizers hoped to create a situation where politicians would need to address immigration as a central campaign issue.
Beyond immediate and medium-term goals, organizers indicated long-term goals of building lasting organizing networks and helping young people become politically active. Participation in demonstrations created opportunities for political education, relationship-building, and skill development that could sustain movements beyond the initial moment of protest.
Research on social movement effectiveness indicates that protest’s most lasting impacts often come not from immediate policy change but from the organizing skills and political understanding they gained during mobilization. Those who participated in the 2026 walkouts gained experience with organizing, experienced the power of collective action, and developed relationships with peers and mentors that could support continued engagement.
What Comes Next
The walkouts could represent the beginning rather than the end of immigration activism. Organizers might maintain school-based organizing infrastructure, establish regular actions, and increase pressure through ongoing campaigns for school sanctuary policies. The 2018 March for Our Lives movement maintained organizing for years after the initial walkouts, though gun rights opposition differs from immigration enforcement resistance in important ways.
Alternatively, immigrant rights organizations and sympathetic elected officials might direct student activism toward election work and legislative campaigns, turning protest energy into political work. This could involve established organizations securing funding for organizing programs and emphasizing electoral strategy as the primary pathway to immigration reform.
State and federal authorities might move aggressively against organizers and schools supporting activism, making it costly enough to stop people from participating. This could involve follow-through on Texas officials’ threats to investigate schools, impose funding penalties, and investigate individual educators.
Or activism might contribute to broader coalitions with other groups on immigration reform, joining forces with labor unions, faith communities, immigrant rights organizations, and sympathetic politicians in a sustained campaign for legislative change.
The trajectory will depend on strategic choices, political context, and the combined effect of organizing work over months and years to come.
Thousands chose to walk out in February 2026 not because they believed a single day of protest would halt federal immigration enforcement, but because they believed speaking out mattered. Because they believed their immigrant family members and classmates needed to see visible support. Because they believed building a movement required taking the first step, even when the path forward remained uncertain.
As one told reporters at the Los Angeles demonstration: “Today, we’re protesting for the rights of our parents, for the people who are scared to leave their houses. Even if we’re a small group, it’s important for us to show up.”
This article analyzes protest and activism tactics for educational purposes. We aim to contribute to effective and ethical efforts across the political spectrum, and we present diverse viewpoints and ideas without endorsement.