Karina Delgado, Communications Intern, and Bill DeBaun, Senior Director, Data and Strategic Initiatives
Reading time: Seven minutes
On June 4, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit against the state of Texas over its granting of in-state tuition rates to undocumented students attending public institutions. On the same day, US District Court Judge Reed O’Connor granted a permanent injunction that Texas has signaled it will not appeal. The policy change ends a 24-year-old Texas policy that was the first of its kind nationally. On June 24, the National Immigration Law Center (NILC) filed a motion in an effort to overturn the injunction.
33 other states provide for in-state tuition for undocumented students, according to the Higher Ed Immigration Portal. Legal experts, including the National Immigration Law Center (NIL) contend
the Section 505 of 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) explicitly allows states to extend these benefits, as long as
they are equally available to US citizens who meet the same non-residency-based criteria, such as graduating from an in-state high school.
Earlier this year, Florida eliminated in-state tuition benefits for undocumented students– a move criticized by student
and immigration advocates for conflicting with federal law.
Texas’ version of the policy required a student to graduate from a Texas high school or to earn a GED, have resided in Texas for
at least three years before their high school graduation date (or the date of GED receipt), and to sign an affidavit that they would apply for permanent residency at the earliest opportunity to do so.
Dr. Ana Acevedo, CEO of the San Antonio Education Partnership, a National College Attainment Network (NCAN) member, in a statement from her organization, noted: “The recent decision by the state of Texas to eliminate
access to in-state tuition for students without legal status, a benefit established by the Texas Dream Act in 2001, is devastating. This policy reversal reintroduces significant financial barriers for students who have grown up in our communities,
attended our schools, and aspired to pursue higher education in Texas with the desire to work as contributing members in a thriving economy.”
Unfortunately, the DOJ may not be done with this strategy of forcing states to deny in-state tuition rates to undocumented students. Two weeks after filing its lawsuit in Texas, the department filed a similar complaint in the Eastern District of Kentucky. About a week after that, the DOJ filed a similar complaint in Minnesota.
The Impact in Numbers is Substantial
This court decision impacts tens of thousands of students across Texas. The Higher Ed Immigration Portal estimates that there are more than 73,000 undocumented students enrolled in higher education in Texas. This is the second most among states, trailing
only California.
The number of undocumented students enrolled in higher education in Texas exceeds the total higher education enrollment of ten states, as the chart below states. This sizeable impact in supporting the postsecondary pathways of these students is
likely to ripple outward and affect families, communities, and the state overall.
An Exclusionary Policy That Will Harm Students and Texas
The court’s decision, and Texas’ declining to appeal, resemble other attacks on undocumented and immigrant communities seen across the United States in recent months. Support for the court decision asserts that undocumented individuals and immigrants
are a drain on their communities and take resources from American citizens. See, for example, US Attorney General Pam Bondi, “The Justice Department commends Texas leadership…for swiftly working with us to halt a program that was treating Americans
like second-class citizens in their own country” and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton: “This law was an insult to our nation's citizens and has now been rightly stopped from being enforced. I will continue to fight for the American people and work
swiftly to defeat any policy that puts illegal aliens ahead of our own citizens." Both come from a statement from the DOJ.
However, this view ignores the social and economic contributions undocumented students, and their families, make to Texas. Many pay taxes, work in essential industries, and have deep roots in their communities. The financial impact of allowing these students
to pay in-state tuition is minimal compared to the long-term economic gains of a more educated, skilled workforce, see for example NCAN’s Economic Value Profile for Texas,
which suggests that each additional postsecondary graduate increases the state’s GDP by more than $160,000 over their lifetime.
This policy change seems less about redistributing funds within public programs and more about exclusion. It targets a young group of Texans, who are part of communities, schools and campuses, and the future of Texas. The policy change tells these students
they don’t belong, largely in service to a political agenda that has emphasized disruption, uncertainty, and cruelty in undocumented communities. Beyond that, as the NILC notes,
the lawsuit and injunction run “contrary to the demonstrated will of Texas communities and the acts of the Texas legislature, which just two days prior had an opportunity to repeal this law and declined to do so.”
NCAN Members Weigh In
NCAN has more than 500 members across the United States, and 40 of them operate in Texas. This should come as no surprise given the size of the state and its substantial population of students and families who need college access and success services
to pursue and complete a postsecondary pathway.
Some NCAN members are expressing concern over Texas’ recent decision to eliminate in-state tuition for undocumented students. They note that the decision undermines efforts to increase postsecondary attainment and creates financial barriers for students
who have lived in Texas for most of their lives, preventing them from accessing higher education across Texas’ public institutions.
Jesse Hendrix, Executive Director of College Possible Texas, explained, "Nearly 80% of undocumented students choose to attend public colleges in-state. For undocumented students, many of whom have grown up in Texas, losing access to in-state tuition means
their dreams are suddenly unaffordable.” The policy changes have forced undocumented students who are currently enrolled in summer courses and have received in-state tuition and state financial aid through the Texas Application for State Financial
Aid (TASFA) for the upcoming fall semester to
rethink their degree-seeking plans due to financial gaps.
Students who were once eligible for in-state tuition may now be forced to pay three to four times more under out-of-state tuition
rates, effectively preventing students from obtaining a college degree. This shortsighted decision undermines the state's workforce and higher education goals. Hendrix worries that instead of closing equity gaps, this policy will widen them by intensifying
the enrollment cliff (which will impact
institutions’ ability to make their classes and make operating more difficult) and undermining progress toward the 60x30TX goal of ensuring 60% of Texans earn a postsecondary certificate or degree.
Hendrix added this encouraging message for students impacted by this court decision and resulting policy change:
“To students and families feeling discouraged: You are not alone, and your dreams are still valid. Before making any big decisions, talk to a trusted counselor, advisor, or college access organization. Make note of registration and drop deadlines, and
give yourself time as colleges determine how they’ll respond to this policy. Even now, there are people and programs ready to support you. Reach out. Ask questions. Don’t opt out without exploring every option.”
Acevedo concluded, "This is not just a setback for individual students; it is a loss for our entire community. These students represent future teachers, nurses, doctors, engineers, and community leaders. When we limit opportunities, we also limit the
potential of our workforce, our economy, and our shared future. Despite this moment of uncertainty, SAEP remains steadfast in our commitment. We will continue to support all students in navigating their path to and through college.”
What’s Next?
The Attorney General of Texas is declining to appeal the district court judge’s injunction on the Texas Dream Act. NILC is representing Austin Community College District’s Board of Trustees, La Unión del Pueblo Entero (LUPE), and college graduate student,
Oscar Silva. While the proceedings are ongoing, the case will ultimately be adjudicated in court, ensuring that all parties have a fair opportunity to present their arguments.
In a statement on their website, NILC notes in part:
Because of the collusive and speedy manner in which the state of Texas and the federal government entered into their agreement, the Court had no opportunity to consider the question of the constitutionality of the law or hear from the people most impacted
by its judgment.
--- In brokering this hasty agreement, the United States and the Texas Attorney General attempted to impermissibly circumvent the legislative process and abused the judicial process to invalidate the law.
---
NCAN and our members remain dedicated to supporting all students on their journey to and through college, and we will offer further updates in Texas, Kentucky, Minnesota, and across the country as warranted.
Email to a Friend
