Studying law is not just about mastering case precedents and statutes. It is about cultivating the moral judgment needed to maintain a democratic society. Genuine legal education teaches students where those rules come from and how they have changed over time in response to the struggle for justice. The USC Gould School of Law, as one of the premiere law schools in the country, presents itself as an institution committed to public service and access to justice. 

We learn from our first class that no one is above the law, even private entities. We learn how the law has been utilized as a tool to both oppress and to liberate. This message carries weight as Gould’s curriculum and faculty suggests the school wants graduates who will defend democratic values. 

However, this commitment isn’t reflected in institutional choices.  

Every year, Gould hosts a recruitment marathon where Juris Doctor students have the opportunity to submit their resumes to selected employers. The event is scheduled for Tuesday and will play host to the Department of Homeland Security. Given the year of terror and violation of constitutional provisions, DHS’s presence signals compliance with the events that have unfolded. 

In response, the Latinx Law Student Association at Gould alongside supporting law student organizations published a letter condemning the school’s approval to host Immigration Customs Enforcement and Customs Border Enforcement at a virtual job fair. 

The department’s job openings are for full-time hires and interns for the purpose of “litigating all removal cases including those against criminal aliens.” Wrapped in the language of litigation and enforcement is a concrete reality: These roles contribute to a system that detains, deports and separates families. 

At Gould, students learn about the purpose of due process and its expansion to protect immigrants. No one can avoid the videos of immigration agents violently detaining individuals. One video presents agents continuing detaining a man while experiencing a seizure — based on the recent experiences of many Americans, there is no sense of compassion for immigrants by immigration officers.  

Gould Dean Franita Tolson defended the participation of the Department of Homeland Security in the recruitment event in a statement, writing that the program is “virtual and voluntary.” That framing suggests that the law school’s role is neutral by allowing students to decide for themselves. However, a law school’s job fair is not a random job board on the internet. The career opportunities Gould’s job fairs provide students reflect the kind of legal professionals they aim to create. 

When Gould admits an employer into its recruiting spaces, it signals that the employer’s work falls within the range of careers the institution deems professional and ethically acceptable for its graduates. That is not neutral: It is a form of endorsement, just softly phrased. 

In an earlier installment of this column, I questioned the University’s stance on what would happen if one student reported another to immigration authorities. The law school’s approval of DHS participation in its job fair provides a clear answer: It will not intervene. 

Instead, it will provide its students with the opportunity to work with the agency that has oppressed fellow classmates. 

When a school that claims to champion justice allows agencies with long records of detaining citizens, racially profiling communities and dehumanizing immigrants to recruit under its banner, the value of what it means to be a leading legal institution begins to fall apart. The lessons of the United States Constitution become meaningless if the law school is willing to allow its students to defend agencies which have violated those lessons.  

USC is not the first institution to host immigration agencies at its carrier fairs. California State University Pomona included CBP as an in-person recruiter for one of its job fairs. Upon student, alumni and community advocacy, the job fair was postponed. 

Just because USC is not an outlier doesn’t mean immigration enforcement agencies should be normalized as a routine employer. They are not. Routine employers don’t detain U.S. citizens and use physical violence in their enforcement. They don’t relish in their cruelty toward others and justify their actions because they are under the “rule of law.”

Ultimately, this controversy is not about one recruiting cycle, but the kind of lawyers Gould aims to shape and the legal culture it chooses to endorse. 

If Gould allows this quiet normalization to continue, the next ICE or CBP lawyer could come from our University. They will graduate carrying the diploma stamped with the same promises of justice that their work will betray. The law school will continue to invoke its mission and teach the rule of law, but neither can mask the reality of who it chooses to defend. 

Disclaimer: Heydy Vasquez currently serves as President at Legal Studies Student Association.

Heydy Vasquez is a senior majoring in Legal Studies writing about immigration policy and its effects on students in her column “Undocutales,” which runs every other Friday, she is also the Opinion editor.