logo
What to know as Trump administration targets tuition breaks for students without legal status

What to know as Trump administration targets tuition breaks for students without legal status

Hindustan Times05-06-2025
AUSTIN, Texas — For two decades on Texas college campuses, it was a resilient law in the face of Republicans' hardening immigration agenda: in-state tuition prices for students who did not have legal resident status.
But in a flash, the Texas policy that was the first of its kind in the U.S. was halted Wednesday, blocked by a federal judge hours after the Justice Department sued to dismantle it. Republican Texas leaders did not fight the challenge, but instead eagerly joined it.
The surprise and quick end to the law, known as the 'Texas Dream Act,' stunned immigration advocates and Democrats, who called it a cruel punishment for hardworking students that will ultimately hurt the state's economy. Republicans cheered the outcome and U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi suggested that states with similar tuition policies could face similar actions.
The lighting ruling ended a Texas policy that had once enjoyed bipartisan support when it was created in 2001, helped tens of thousands of students get into college and spawned similar laws in two dozen states.
Here's what to know:
The Texas tuition policy was initially passed with sweeping bipartisan majorities in the state Legislature and signed into law by then-Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, as a way to open access to higher education for students without legal residency already living in the state. Supporters then and now say it boosted the state's economy by creating a better-educated and better-prepared workforce.
The law allowed students without legal resident status to qualify for in-state tuition if they had lived in Texas for three years before graduating from high school, and for a year before enrolling in college. They also had to sign an affidavit promising to apply for legal resident status as soon as possible.
Texas now has about 57,000 qualifying students enrolled in its public universities and colleges, according to the Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, a nonpartisan nonprofit group of university leaders focused on immigration policy. The state has about 690,000 students overall at its public universities.
The difference in tuition rates is substantial.
For example, at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, a 34,000-student campus along the border with Mexico, a state resident will pay about $10,000 in basic tuition for a minimum full-time class schedule in the upcoming school year. A non-resident student will pay $19,000.
'UTRGV understands that the consent judgment may affect financial plans already made by individual students," the school said in a statement Thursday. "Our priority and focus are on minimizing disruption to student success consistent with applicable law and helping students navigate this transition with clarity and care.'
The law stood mostly unchallenged for years, but it came under fire as debates over illegal immigration intensified. In the 2012 Republican presidential primary, Perry ended up apologizing after saying critics of the law 'did not have a heart.'
The law withstood several repeal efforts in the Republican-dominated Legislature. In the legislative session that ended on June 2, a repeal bill did not even get a vote.
But the ax fell quickly. On Wednesday, the Trump administration filed a lawsuit calling the law unconstitutional. State Attorney General Ken Paxton, a key Trump ally, chose not to defend the law in court and instead filed a motion agreeing that it should not be enforced.
With the state administration aligned with the Trump administration, the law was suddenly struck down by a federal judge without even an argument on the lawsuit's merits or a response from the students affected.
The Trump administration challenged the law in a border state where Gov. Greg Abbott, Paxton and the Republican leadership have given full-throated support to his immigrant crackdown efforts and have spent billions trying to help.
The ruling also expanded efforts by Trump to influence higher education across the country. The administration has leveraged federal funding and its student visa authority to clamp down on campus activism and stamp out diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.
The ruling affected only the Texas law, but with nearly half of U.S. states having similar policies, Bondi suggested the administration could pursue similar action elsewhere. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis recently signed a bill to repeal the law in that state in July.
'Other states should take note that we will continue filing affirmative litigation to remedy unconstitutional state laws that discriminate against American citizens,' Bondi said.
Immigration lawyers and education advocates said they are assessing if there are legal avenues to challenge the Texas ruling.
'Make no mistake, advocates, students, campuses are not going to just take this,' said Miriam Feldblum, president and chief executive officer of the Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration. 'But I have no doubt there will be an effort to do this .'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Who is Tyler Boebert? Lauren Boebert's troubled eldest son faces new legal troubles over child abuse
Who is Tyler Boebert? Lauren Boebert's troubled eldest son faces new legal troubles over child abuse

Hindustan Times

timean hour ago

  • Hindustan Times

Who is Tyler Boebert? Lauren Boebert's troubled eldest son faces new legal troubles over child abuse

Rep. Lauren Boebert's grandson was involved in an incident that resulted to her troublesome eldest son, Tyler Boebert, being charged with child abuse. Tyler Boebert Charged with Felony Child Abuse Amid Family Troubles(Instagram/Lauren Boebert) Citing records from the Windsor Police Department, Denver Westword reported on Saturday that Tyler, the 20-year-old son of the Republican congressman and her ex-husband, Jayson, was charged with a felony in Colorado on July 11. Also Read: Congresswoman Lauren Boebert's son allegedly made a 'sex tape' with co-accused, affidavit reveals Lauren Boebert speaks out While downplaying the accusations against her son, Boebert claimed that it was the consequence of 'a miscommunication on monitoring my young grandson that recently led to him getting out of our house.' Boebert, who serves in Colorado's fourth congressional district, described the occurrence as a 'one-time incident' and stated that the boy was unharmed. 'I am confident this is a one-time incident that we have addressed as a family,' the 38-year-old grandmother said. In 2023, the three-term congresswoman revealed that Tyler's partner became pregnant with his child while he was just 17 years old. This case is the most recent in a series of legal troubles affecting Boebert's eldest son. Cases against Tyler Boebert In September 2022, Tyler reportedly injured his passenger when he flipped his dad's SUV while driving. He was ticketed for reckless driving, but as part of a plea agreement with Garfield County prosecutors, the matter was ultimately reduced to a 'defective vehicle for headlights' violation. Tyler reported his father's abuse of him at their house to the police in January 2024. In a Garfield County arrest document, Jayson Boebert was charged with pushing Tyler to the floor and putting his thumb in his mouth, which led to his arrest. Tyler was on two-year probation after entering a guilty plea to trying identity theft in October 2024. Boebert was barred from using illicit substances and had to perform 80 hours of volunteer work as part of his probation, according to Westword. Tyler Boebert is expected to appear in Weld County Court regarding the child abuse complaint on September 8.

Trump's prosecution demand for Beyonce, Oprah Winfrey trolled by netizens: 'Deflecting from Epstein files'
Trump's prosecution demand for Beyonce, Oprah Winfrey trolled by netizens: 'Deflecting from Epstein files'

Hindustan Times

timean hour ago

  • Hindustan Times

Trump's prosecution demand for Beyonce, Oprah Winfrey trolled by netizens: 'Deflecting from Epstein files'

President Donald Trump has accused Oprah Winfrey and Beyoncé of taking millions from the Democratic Party in exchange for endorsing candidates during the 2024 election. Trump claimed the two celebrities received a combined $14 million from Democrats, while TV personality Al Sharpton was paid a smaller amount, according to a Newsweek report. President Donald Trump claimed the two celebrities received a combined $14 million from Democrats and Al Sharpton was paid a smaller amount.(AP) Earlier, Trump alleged that Beyoncé got $11 million to briefly appear at a campaign event and endorse Kamala Harris without performing. On Saturday evening, he posted on Truth Social that he plans to investigate the payments. Also Read: Trump blasts California wildfire aid, questions missing $100 million FireAid money Donald Trump slams endorsement decision In his post, Trump wrote, 'I'm looking at the large amount of money owed by the Democrats, after the Presidential Election, and the fact that they admit to paying, probably illegally, Eleven Million Dollars to singer Beyoncé for an ENDORSEMENT (she never sang, not one note, and left the stage to a booing and angry audience!), Three Million Dollars for 'expenses,' to Oprah, Six Hundred Thousand Dollars to a very low-rated TV 'anchor,' Al Sharpton (a total lightweight!), and others to be named for doing, absolutely NOTHING!' He added, 'These ridiculous fees were incorrectly stated in the books and records. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO PAY FOR AN ENDORSEMENT. IT IS TOTALLY ILLEGAL TO DO SO. Can you imagine what would happen if politicians started paying for people to endorse them.' Trump concluded the post with "All hell would break out! Kamala, and all of those that received Endorsement money, BROKE THE LAW. They should all be prosecuted!" Also Read: Trump to prosecute Beyonce, Oprah and Kamala Harris? POTUS warns 'All hell would break out!' Netizens react to Trump's claim Netizens on X shared their reactions, where one of the users asked, "What crime are you gonna charge Beyonce/Oprah for? Harris, sure. But what "crime" did the two H'wood demons commit?" Another user wrote, 'He is trying to distract from child rape." A user quipped, 'The contents of the Epstein files must really be damaging." Another user chimed, 'Trump falsely claimed Beyoncé and Oprah were 'illegally' paid to endorse Biden and said Kamala Harris should be prosecuted. No proof. Just distraction.' One user wrote, 'e paid the Chick-fil-A lady, he paid the original crowd when he came down the escalator, he also filled the black church with MAGAets. And let's not forget he paid Stormy Daniels, to name a few. So GTFOH with those accusations and stop deflecting from the Epstein files.' How much campaign pay Beyoncé? Federal Election Commission records do not show an $11 million payment from the Harris campaign to Beyoncé. However, the campaign did make a $165,000 payment to Parkwood Entertainment, Beyoncé's company, on November 19. That was a few weeks after she endorsed Harris at a rally in Houston. At that rally, Beyoncé said, "I'm not here as a celebrity. I'm not here as a politician. I'm here as a mother—a mother who cares deeply about the world my children and all of our children live in, a world where we have the freedom to control our bodies, a world where we're not divided." So far, the White House has not said whether any legal action will be taken.

US tariff deadline of August 1 is firm, no extensions: Commerce secretary
US tariff deadline of August 1 is firm, no extensions: Commerce secretary

Economic Times

timean hour ago

  • Economic Times

US tariff deadline of August 1 is firm, no extensions: Commerce secretary

The United States will implement tariffs on August 1. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick confirmed no extensions will be granted. Customs will collect the money from the mentioned date. This decision sends a message to trading partners. They must meet commitments to strike trade deals with the Trump administration. Earlier, President Trump had mentioned the deadline could be extended or not. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Rising tariff floor: Trump sets 15% as the starting point Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The United States will not offer any extensions to its August 1 tariff deadline , Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick confirmed on Sunday, according to AFP. This rules out any possibility of a second extension from the initial July 9 deadline set by President Trump.'So no extensions, no more grace periods. August 1, the tariffs are set. They'll go into place. Customs will start collecting the money, and off we go,' Lutnick told Fox News announcement sends a firm and final message to US trading partners: the deadline is real, and time-bound commitments must now be met. This is particularly relevant for countries, including India, still hoping to strike trade agreements with the Trump administration ahead of the so-called "reciprocal tariff" Donald Trump had earlier left the door open to a possible delay, saying the deadline 'could or could not' be extended. But Lutnick's remarks eliminate that uncertainty, cementing August 1 as the date when the new tariff regime will officially come into days before the deadline, the two-time Republican President indicated that the baseline tariff rate would be no lower than 15%, up from the 10% figure initially floated in at an AI summit in Washington on July 24, he said, 'We'll have a straight, simple tariff of anywhere between 15% and 50%. We have 50 because we haven't been getting along with those countries too well.'Earlier this month, Trump said that letters were being sent to more than 150 countries, informing them of the tariff hike. 'Probably 10 or 15%, we haven't decided yet,' he said at the time. But with the president now confirming a 15% floor and a possible ceiling of 50%, the scope of these levies appears to be Secretary Lutnick added further clarity during a separate interview with CBS News, stating that smaller nations—particularly in Latin America, the Caribbean, and Africa—would face a baseline tariff of 10%, slightly lower than the new floor, but still significant compared to pre-April norms.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store