And again, I wish them all the best.
An advocacy group is seeking a new federal appeals court hearing in its effort to defend the Texas Dream Act, a longstanding state law that allowed some undocumented students to pay in-state tuition at public colleges and universities.
This summer, a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled advocacy groups, Austin Community College and a student seeking to restore the state law could not step into the case to defend the Texas Dream Act because federal law bars states from giving undocumented students a tuition benefit based on residency unless the same benefit is available to all U.S. citizens, regardless of where they live.
Texas’ law allowed students who graduated from a Texas high school or earned an equivalent diploma in the state, lived in Texas and pledged to seek permanent residency when eligible to pay in-state tuition, even if they did not have legal immigration status.
La Unión del Pueblo Entero, one of the groups in the case, filed a petition on Monday asking the entire 5th Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider the ruling and allow LUPE and others to defend the Texas law.
“As college students prepare to start school this week across the state, we are thinking about all of those who are having to put their dream of a higher education on hold because of the financial hurdles resulting from the repeal of the Texas Dream Act,” Luis Castillo Vela, LUPE’s director of communications, said in a statement.
After the 2-1 ruling came down in July, Gov. Greg Abbott praised the decision on X, saying Texas and the Trump administration’s Justice Department “just secured another major victory for the rule of law.”
Officials from LUPE and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund called the ruling a disappointment.
“Education is a human right, no matter someone’s immigration status or background,” said Tania Chavez Camacho, LUPE’s president and executive director.
Thomas A. Saenz, president and general counsel of MALDEF, which represents Students for Affordable Tuition, said the organization would seek further review in federal court after consulting with its clients.
Saenz said the panel majority was “now complicit in one of the greatest juridical travesties in recent history,” referring to the swift end of the Texas Dream Act after Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office and the Trump administration agreed the law should be blocked.
Austin Community College said in a statement that it “remains focused on supporting all students and the community we serve” and would follow the law while continuing its mission to provide “accessible, high-quality education and opportunities for all.”
See here for the previous entry. I repeat every unkind and fully true thing I said about this godforsaken court, and the same for the judge-in-name-only who allowed this corrupt bargain in the first place. All they’re asking is for the opportunity to intervene in a lawsuit that directly affects them, which just seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to ask, especially in this context. Give them their chance to be heard.
I get the outrage and have no dog in this fight, but if “federal law bars states from giving undocumented students a tuition benefit based on residency unless the same benefit is available to all U.S. citizens, regardless of where they live.”, what exactly is the issue here ? Vote in representatives who can change the federal law and quit the whining, OR work towards becoming a US citizen/Texas State resident so you can then pay in-State tuition prices. Seems to be the $s it’d take to make yourself legal would be offset by the tuition savings…
C.L., the Texas law was structured to provide tuition benefits not based on residency but based on whether the applicant had graduated from a Texas high school. Proponents said this complied wiht federal law, opponents said this was just residency by a different name and violated the statute. I (unfortunately) think the opponents probably have the better argument, but it’s not a frivilous argument on either side.
C.L. when exactly did your ancestors come to this country? Work toward becoming a US citizen obviously you don’t know anything about that.
@Meme/Manny, I’m a mutt with ancestors from four different countries, but when they came to America isn’t germane to the issue. If Federal law says, in effect, you have to at least be a documented and/or legal citizen of the US to quality for a State in-State tuition cost, and Federal law trumps State law, I’m not so sure filing a lawsuit or formulating a strongly worded rebuttal to the 5th Circuit’s Opinion is going to do anything.
One of the best takes I ever read online is that our immigration system was never designed to work the way most people assume. Our economy runs on cheap immigrant labor, and the system provides. It would also throw a few bones to the xenophobic crowd by harassing and arresting some of them, but never imposing meaningful sanctions on those who hire under the table. With ICE running amuck now I think the current system is irredeemable and unfixable . It needs a complete tear down and rebuild.
C.L., unfortunately, it is germane to the issue because, depending on when they arrived, they didn’t take tests. After they came in, were there laws that said they should probably, so let them become citizens is not an option for most of them. There are ways, or were ways, to marry a citizen, for example, but it is not guaranteed.
No, European immigrants arriving around 1920 did not take a standardized civics or history test to enter the country or become citizens, but they did face a literacy test upon arrival.Entry and the Literacy TestImmigration Act of 1917: Imposed a mandatory literacy test for immigrants over 16 years old.The Test: Immigrants had to read 30 to 40 words in their native language or another language to prove basic reading comprehension.Exemptions: Religious persecution refugees and certain close family members were sometimes exempt.
The Major Change: Bureaucracy in 1929Act of March 2, 1929: This law completely overhauled the naturalization process just before 1930.Standardized Forms: It introduced uniform application forms and a centralized system under the Bureau of Naturalization.Certificate of Arrival: Applicants now strictly required an official certificate proving they had entered the country legally.Becoming a Citizen in 1930No Written Exam: The uniform, multiple-choice or written U.S. history test used today did not exist.The Preliminary Examination: Instead of a casual chat with a judge, immigrants in 1930 faced a formal interview with a designated Naturalization Examiner.Oral Interview: The examiner asked oral questions to verify the applicant’s ability to speak English and tested their basic knowledge of U.S. government, history, and the Constitution.Witness Testimony: Applicants still had to bring two American citizen witnesses to court to verify their 5-year residency and good moral character.
So when did your ancestors arrive C.L.?
C.L., “just become legal” always sounds so easy coming from people who never had to do it….
You say it like there’s a counter at the DMV where they hand out citizenship if you bring two forms of ID and a utility bill. That is not how this works, the system is not only broken, but backed up… and the immigration judges that were any good have be let go or left. The marching orders for immigration judges now are pretty much, bye bye…. They are an assigned position, no law degree required, that type of “Judge”
A lot of these kids grew up in Texas, went to Texas schools, graduated from Texas high schools, and are trying to do exactly what people like you claim you want: get educated, work, pay taxes, and get right with the system when there is actually a path available.
But now even when people are in the process, or trying to find a legal path, this administration and its supporters still look at them and say “illegal” like that one word erases everything else about them.
“Vote to change the law” is easy to say too. Great, let’s do that. But in the meantime, real people are getting crushed while politicians and courts play games with their lives, kind of crazy for a supposed “Christian Nation”
And the “the money saved on tuition can pay to become legal” line is just ridiculous. Immigration law is not a vending machine. You don’t put in tuition savings and a green card falls out…..if only.
Maybe walk a mile in their shoes before acting like the answer is so obvious. It is amazing how simple immigration looks when you are standing on the lucky side of it.