(C) Arizona Mirror
This story was originally published by Arizona Mirror and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .
Arizona AG says undocumented student tuition law is safe from Trump lawsuits [1]
['Gloria Rebecca Gomez', 'John Washington Arizona Luminaria', 'Neal Morton The Hechinger Report', 'More From Author', '- August', '.Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus-Coauthors.Is-Layout-Flow', 'Class', 'Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus', 'Display Inline', '.Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus-Avatar']
Date: 2025-08
Amid a wave of litigation from the federal government seeking to end in-state tuition rates for undocumented students, Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes says the decision by voters to make college more affordable for noncitizen students in the Grand Canyon State complies with federal law — insulating it against attacks from the Trump administration.
Just a few years ago, there was bipartisan support for the idea, but easing access to higher education for noncitizen students has become a target for Republicans — led by President Donald Trump — and is another facet of the GOP-controlled federal government’s anti-immigrant agenda. For example, Karrin Taylor Robson, one of the leading contenders for the Republican gubernatorial nomination in 2026, endorsed the 2022 ballot measure, but last week said she backs Trump’s executive order targeting undocumented students. Robson has been endorsed by Trump.
In April, Trump issued an executive order singling out such policies as illegal and criticized them for favoring immigrants over citizens. Since then, the U.S. Department of Justice has filed lawsuits against Texas, Kentucky, Minnesota and Oklahoma challenging decades-old laws aimed at increasing access to higher education.
Three years ago, Arizonans narrowly approved Proposition 308, eliminating restrictions on college tuition rates and state financial aid that forced many undocumented students who graduated from Arizona high schools to pay exorbitant amounts or forgo college altogether. The law allows any student, regardless of their citizenship status, to qualify for in-state tuition rates and state-funded scholarships if they have lived in Arizona and attended a local high school for at least two years and graduated, or received equivalent documentation from homeschooling.
More than 3,600 undocumented students graduate from Arizona high schools every year, and their ability to continue their education may depend on the law’s future. In a legal opinion issued on Tuesday, Mayes appeared to allay fears about that future, writing that the law Prop. 308 created is perfectly legal. She concluded that the two federal laws the Trump administration has so far employed to challenge higher education access in other states can’t be used to block the Arizona law.
“Prop. 308 is consistent with federal law,” the Democrat wrote in her one-sentence conclusion.
No public benefits — unless you pass a new law
Two federal laws limit how undocumented people can attend college. One directly prohibits noncitizens from receiving any state or local public benefits, including postsecondary education, that is paid for with public funds. The other forbids allowing noncitizens to pay in-state tuition based on their residency unless any citizen, regardless of where they live in the country, can also benefit from the same rate.
Mayes pointed out that the first law carries with it a caveat that eliminates any potential conflict with Prop. 308: It expressly allows noncitizens to receive a public benefit if a state chooses to pass a law that “affirmatively provides for such eligibility.” Because Prop. 308 modified preexisting state law that made it more difficult for undocumented people to afford higher education, and also set new guidelines for when a person can qualify for in-state tuition, Mayes argued that it satisfies the exception in the federal law that prevents noncitizens from receiving public benefits. When 51% of Arizona voters agreed to enshrine a new standard into state law, the requirements of that federal law were met.
No making tuition contingent on residency — but other criteria is OK
The initiative also complies with the federal law that makes it illegal to base an undocumented person’s access to in-state tuition rates on residency, Mayes wrote. That’s because Prop. 308 doesn’t turn on a person’s residency, but on their physical presence in the state and their attendance and graduation from a local high school, or an equivalent achievement.
By contrast, Oklahoma’s tuition policy specifically mentions residency, stating: any person “who resided in Oklahoma at the time of graduation from an Oklahoma high school and has resided in the state with a parent or legal guardian for two years” is eligible for in-state tuition.
Mayes wrote that Prop. 308 doesn’t center around residency, and because of that, it doesn’t violate federal law.
“Because Proposition 308 confers no eligibility for a postsecondary education benefit on the basis of residence—and instead uses other criteria—it is consistent with (the federal law),” she wrote.
The courts have long understood that particular federal law as limited to banning states from tying in-state tuition rates to residency requirements, leaving the door open to alternative eligibility thresholds. In 2010, California’s Supreme Court ruled that a law allowing students to pay in-state tuition if they have attended high school in the state for three years doesn’t violate federal law because it doesn’t make its eligibility dependent on residency. And even before voters greenlit Prop. 308, Arizona’s main tuition law mandated that students must be “domiciled” in the state for at least a year to qualify for in-state rates.
Mayes added that Prop. 308’s broad eligibility criteria mean that it doesn’t apply to just immigrant or undocumented students, either. Some people may have graduated from a local high school, only to move out of state later, but still have plans to return to Arizona for college. Others may have grown up traveling back and forth between an Arizona school and tribal land, much of which spans multiple states. In the end, residency isn’t a requirement in Prop. 308, which makes it legal and unchallengeable under current federal laws.
“Residence is not what triggers eligibility under (Prop. 308,” Mayes wrote. “Although many people who meet the eligibility requirements will also be residents, not all will be. And whether someone is or is not a resident is simply not relevant to the eligibility inquiry under (Prop.308).”
***UPDATED: This story has been updated to note Karrin Taylor Robson’s change from backing Prop. 308 in 2022 to now opposing in-state tuition and backing Trump’s efforts to end it nationwide.
[END]
---
[1] Url:
https://azmirror.com/briefs/arizona-ag-says-undocumented-student-tuition-law-is-safe-from-trump-lawsuits/
Published and (C) by Arizona Mirror
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.
via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/azmirror/
