Undocumented immigrants in Texas no longer qualify for in-state college tuition

This week, the U.S. Justice Department filed a lawsuit against the state, challenging the legality of the 2001 law.

This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

Legal challenge

According to the article, a Texas law that had allowed undocumented immigrants to qualify for in-state college tuition was struck down after the U.S. Justice Department filed a lawsuit against the state. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, in coordination with the Trump administration, requested a federal judge to declare the law unconstitutional. Federal Judge Reed O’Connor granted this request, resulting in the law being blocked.

Federal stance

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi stated that under federal law, schools cannot provide benefits to undocumented immigrants that are not available to U.S. citizens. She said, 'The Justice Department will relentlessly fight to vindicate federal law and ensure that U.S. citizens are not treated like second-class citizens anywhere in the country.'

Advocacy for education

Don Graham, co-founder of TheDream.US scholarship fund, warned that the ruling could deny higher education opportunities to promising and motivated students. Graham emphasized that many affected students pursue careers in high-need fields such as nursing and education, and stated, 'Some of the brightest young students in the country…will be denied an opportunity for higher education.'

Full story

After more than two decades on the books, a Texas law that allowed undocumented immigrants to qualify for in-state college tuition has been struck down. This week, the U.S. Justice Department filed a lawsuit against the state, challenging the legality of the 2001 law.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a joint motion with the Trump administration, asking a federal judge to declare the law unconstitutional. Federal Judge Reed O’Connor of the Northern District of Texas agreed and issued a ruling that blocked the law.

According to The Texas Tribune, the decision will impact nearly 20,000 undocumented students currently attending colleges and universities in the state.

What has been the reaction?

Paxton claimed victory and said in a statement, “Today, I entered a joint motion along with the Trump Administration opposing a law that unconstitutionally and unlawfully gave benefits to illegal aliens that were not available to American citizens. Ending this discriminatory and un-American provision is a major victory for Texas.”

Texas was the first state in the nation to pass such a law back in 2001. Similar tuition equity policies are being offered by 23 other states.

The immigrant advocacy group FIEL Houston (Immigrant Families and Students in the Fight) condemned the decision, calling it a dark day.

“Without in-state tuition many students who have grown up in Texas, simply will not be able to afford three or four times the tuition other Texas students pay. This is not just. We will take this to the courts and we will continue to fight for the rights of every student in the State of Texas,” the group said in a statement.

FIEL noted that undocumented college students make up 1.5% of the student population in Texas and contribute approximately $84 million to the state university system annually.

What are the financial implications?

Straight Arrow News reviewed tuition rates at the University of Texas at Austin for the 2024-2025 school year. The cost per semester for an in-state student taking 12 credit hours or more ranged from $5,738 to $6,788. For a non-resident, that same 12+ hours costs between $21,888 and $25,553, depending on the major.

Under the now-blocked law, undocumented students could qualify for in-state tuition if they had lived in Texas for at least three years before graduating from high school, resided in the state for one year before enrolling in college and signed a sworn affidavit stating they intended to seek legal residency.

What are federal officials saying?

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, who led the federal lawsuit in Texas, said in a statement, “Under federal law, schools cannot provide benefits to illegal aliens that they do not provide to U.S. citizens. The Justice Department will relentlessly fight to vindicate federal law and ensure that U.S. citizens are not treated like second-class citizens anywhere in the country. “

What are education advocates saying?

Don Graham, co-founder of TheDream.US, a national scholarship fund for undocumented students warned the ruling would shut out promising talent.

“Some of the brightest young students in the country, some of the most motivated, will be denied an opportunity for higher education,” he said.

He added that many of these students pursue careers in high-need fields such as nursing and education.

Jason Morrell (Morning Managing Editor), Jack Henry (Video Editor), and Lawrence Banton (Digital Producer) contributed to this report.

Tags: DACA, Department of Justice, Dreamers, Immigration, Ken Paxton, Pam Bondi, Texas, Trump administration, Undocumented migrants

[CRAIG NIGRELLI]

A MAJOR SHIFT FOR THOUSANDS OF UNDOCUMENTED STUDENTS IN TEXAS.
A LAW THAT LET THEM PAY IN-STATE TUITION IS NOW OFFICIALLY DEAD … AFTER MORE THAN 20 YEARS ON THE BOOKS
THIS WEEK, THE U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT SUED TEXAS… ARGUING THE 2001 LAW VIOLATED FEDERAL LAW.
THE STATE’S ATTORNEY GENERAL KEN PAXTON THEN SIDED WITH THE TRUMP ADMINSTRATION… AND A FEDERAL JUDGE AGREED
THE RULING BLOCKS THE LAW… AFFECTING AN ESTIMATED 20,000 UNDOCUMENTED STUDENTS ACROSS THE STATE.
TEXAS WAS THE FIRST STATE IN THE NATION TO OFFER THIS BENEFIT… NOW 23 OTHERS DO THE SAME
BUT NOW, ADVOCATES SAY THE RULING WILL PRICE MANY LONGTIME TEXAS RESIDENTS OUT OF COLLEGE
THE GROUP IMMIGRANT FAMILIES AND STUDENTS IN THE FIGHT CALLED IT A “DARK DAY”
UNDOCUMENTED STUDENTS MAKE UP 1.5% OF THE STATE’S **COLLEGE POPULATION ** – AND CONTRIBUTE AN ESTIMATED $84 MILLION TO THE SYSTEM.
STRAIGHT ARROW NEWS CHECKED CURRENT TUITION RATES AT U-T AUSTIN: THE COST PER SEMESTER FOR AN IN-STATE STUDENT TAKING 12 CREDIT HOURS OR MORE, STARTS AT $57-HUNDRED DOLLARS
FOR A NON-RESIDENT, AS MUCH AS $25-THOUSAND dollars.
UNDER THE NOW-BLOCKED LAW, STUDENTS HAD TO: HAVE LIVED IN TEXAS FOR AT LEAST THREE YEARS BEFORE GRADUATING FROM HIGH SCHOOL AND RESIDED IN THE STATE FOR ONE YEAR BEFORE ENROLLING IN COLLEGE.
THEY ALSO HAD TO SIGN A SWORN AFFIDAVIT STATING THEY INTENDED TO SEEK LEGAL RESIDENCY.

Why this story matters

The decision to strike down Texas's in-state tuition law for undocumented immigrants directly affects thousands of students' access to higher education and raises questions about state and federal authority in immigration policy.

Access to education

Access to in-state tuition rates for undocumented students is central to their ability to afford college, as stated by advocacy groups and evidenced by the contrast between in-state and non-resident tuition costs.

Legal and policy debate

The ruling highlights ongoing legal disputes over states’ rights versus federal law in determining benefits for undocumented immigrants, with statements from U.S. and Texas officials illustrating conflicting positions.

Impact on communities

Advocates and critics alike note that the decision has immediate financial and social consequences for undocumented students and broader implications for workforce development in Texas and other states with similar laws.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 197 media outlets

Context corner

The Texas law permitting in-state tuition for undocumented students emerged in 2001 amidst efforts to support young residents regardless of immigration status. Over the years, the law faced increasing criticism as nationwide debates over immigration intensified. More recently, similar policies have been adopted in other states, while some, like Florida, are moving to repeal such provisions.

History lesson

The Texas law, known as the Texas Dream Act, was a pioneering measure in 2001, passed with bipartisan support. Since then, related policies were adopted in other states but have faced mounting opposition as immigration policy became more polarized. Legislative attempts to repeal the law in Texas have failed until this recent federal intervention and court ruling.

Underreported

Many articles overlook the specific impact on students’ long-term life and career prospects, such as how losing in-state tuition could result in fewer college graduates entering local industries like education and healthcare. Few stories also address alternative funding or support options that could be available to affected students after this legal change.

Sources

Bias comparison

Media outlets on the left framed the DOJ lawsuit as a defense against discrimination toward out-of-state U.S. students, emphasizing terms like "undocumented immigrants" and portraying the Texas law as longstanding yet unfairly privileging some students, often invoking charged language such as "discriminating" and "relentlessly fight.
Not enough coverage from media outlets in the center to provide a bias comparison.
Media outlets on the right focused on the Trump administration’s enforcement role, employing more aggressive language like "cracks down," "illegal aliens," and "illegals," framing the tuition benefit as an unlawful and unfair advantage that undermines federal law.

Report an issue with this comparison