Students, faculty, staff, and community members packed into Dye Lecture Hall on Feb. 10 for a “Conversations with Counsel” session led by President Carmen Twillie Ambar and Vice President, General Counsel, & Secretary Josh Nolan. The event was held to provide an opportunity for engagement with College leadership about rising national immigration enforcement activity and how the administration is addressing related concerns.
The Conversations with Counsel session came amid heightened national attention on immigration enforcement. In recent weeks, widely circulated videos of federal agents detaining individuals in Minneapolis have sparked unrest and renewed scrutiny of enforcement tactics. At the same time, federal officials have signaled that enforcement activity may expand to Springfield raising concern across the region, particularly for Haitian communities with Temporary Protected Status.
In a campus-wide message sent on Feb. 6, Ambar said she recognized the anxiety many community members may be experiencing and reaffirmed the College’s commitment to safety.
“I have been troubled by what I have seen in Minneapolis and other cities across the country,” Ambar wrote. “The actions captured on videos demonstrate a disregard for human dignity that runs counter to my understanding of what this nation stands for. I also believe in the power of citizens to express their opinions peacefully without harming others or being harmed. These beliefs are foundational to the democratic principles upon which this country was founded.”
Central to the discussion was an explanation of how the College intends to respond if federal agents, such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement, appear on or near campus. Administrators instructed community members to immediately contact Campus Safety if approached by government officials. Campus Safety is responsible for contacting the General Counsel’s Office and coordinating the institutional response. This guidance aligns with the General Counsel’s published “Guidelines for Addressing Campus Visits by Government Law Enforcement Agencies,” which directs members of the campus community to contact Campus Safety and refrain from consenting to provide information or access on behalf of the College.
Throughout the session, administrators emphasized narrowing who may give consent and respond in the moment. Nolan reiterated that members of the campus community should not be placed in a position where they must decide how to respond to government requests independently.
“Our goal is to protect the rights and well-being of our students, faculty, and staff while making sure we comply with lawful requests from government representatives,” Nolan wrote in an email to the Review. “Attorneys in the Office of General Counsel are trained to represent the College in all interactions with government officials and ensure that any request is carefully reviewed before any action is taken.”
Administrators stressed the importance of consistency in responding to government officials and urged community members not to engage independently with federal agents, not to provide personal information, and not to attempt to physically block access. Instead, members were advised to direct interactions through campus authorities who can assess legal documents and protect rights under applicable laws.
The session also addressed how the College distinguishes between different types of law enforcement authority and where those distinctions apply on campus. Legal staff described the differing implications of judicial warrants, which are court-issued and carry specific constitutional protections, and administrative warrants, which carry less weight and may be subject to challenge.
Much of the discussion focused on the difference between public and private spaces at Oberlin, including residence halls, classrooms, and offices, which generally require a higher level of legal authorization to enter, compared to spaces such as building lobbies or venues open to the public. Attendees were reminded that the General Counsel’s Office is responsible for reviewing all warrants and determining how the College should respond in each circumstance.
In addition to legal clarification, administrators addressed how the College’s communication strategy has evolved in response to recent national developments. Officials said the College has communicated immigration-related guidance since last February but made revisions this semester to simplify and clarify procedures.
“We wanted to lightly revise our guidance, based on feedback we heard from students, to make it simpler and more straightforward,” Chief of Staff and Strategy Officer David Hertz wrote in an email to the Review. “We are also responding to recent reports about the possibility of an increased ICE enforcement presence in Springfield, Ohio.”
Hertz said the College aims to balance transparency with stability when communicating during uncertain situations.
“Sharing timely information helps reduce fear and uncertainty and ensures members of our community have the facts they need,” Hertz wrote.
He added that in urgent situations, the College uses ObieAlert to communicate quickly, while less immediate updates are shared through email and Campus Digest to prevent the spread of rumors or inaccurate information.
The College’s approach reflects an effort to centralize decision-making and ensure that official communications are clear, legally informed, and consistent. Attendees were told that the College continues to develop resources designed to support community members, including simplified reference materials to accompany existing guidance documents.
The conversation also included discussion of the role of local law enforcement. Nolan said that the College maintains working relationships with the City of Oberlin Police Department and the Lorain County Sheriff.
“Those conversations have been focused on clarifying roles and developing understanding about how to best protect the community,” Nolan wrote.
Student responses raised concerns about the limitations of protections off-campus, how enforcement actions might play out in practice, and how students could support one another in stressful situations. Many expressed gratitude for the opportunity to ask questions and seek clarification, even as uncertainty about broader federal policy remained.
The event underscored the sense among many students that while the College can provide legal and procedural guidance, individuals may still feel personally vulnerable in the face of national immigration enforcement actions. Administrators said they recognize these fears and reiterated the importance of community support and adherence to established procedures.
Ambar and Nolan said that the College will continue to monitor changes in federal enforcement practices and update its guidance accordingly. Additional sessions and materials are expected to be shared with the campus community as the semester progresses.
