Dreamers are facing higher college costs as states reconsider in-state tuition eligibility rules across the United States
Across the United States, the escalating political battle over in-state tuition and fees for undocumented students is reshaping access to higher education for thousands of young learners. What was once seen as a bipartisan bridge to college is now a point of political and legal contention, leaving many students unsure about whether they can afford to continue their studies.
As CNBC reports, at least 22 states and the District of Columbia still allow undocumented students, including students under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, often called “Dreamers,” to qualify for in-state tuition at public universities if they meet residency and education requirements.For more than two decades, this framework has been a crucial lifeline for students who would otherwise be denied access to university.
However, CNBC highlights that the shift in political climate has prompted many states to roll back these benefits, reviving long-standing debates over immigration, education funding and equality. The result is a growing sense of instability on campuses, as students who planned their futures around affordable education now face sudden financial shocks and difficult choices about whether to remain enrolled or drop out.
The road that has opened doors for decadesIn-state tuition for undocumented students dates back to reforms of the early 2000s, with Texas becoming the first state to pass such a law in 2001 through the Dream Act. Over time, similar policies spread, with CNBC noting that about 25 states eventually adopted similar measures, often with bipartisan support in their early years. The goal is to ensure “Dreamers” can access higher education despite immigration barriers, Gabe Pacheco, president and CEO of TheDream.US, told CNBC, adding that it took many years for many states to agree on such laws.Policy reversal reshapes access to public educationDespite its history, this policy has recently come under increasing scrutiny. Several states, including Texas, have begun rolling back in-state tuition benefits for undocumented students, while others are reconsidering eligibility rules. This shift has revived the national debate over who should benefit from subsidized public education, especially in states facing increasing fiscal pressures and political polarization over immigration policy.Students are caught in financial uncertaintyFor students already enrolled, the changes are very personal. CNBC reported on the experience of Juan, a University of Houston student originally from Galveston, who chose his college in part because of its eligibility for in-state tuition. When Texas moved to eliminate the benefit, “I was really concerned because I was about to expire,” he said, adding that out-of-state tuition would have created a severe financial burden on his family.
While he was able to continue under his DACA status, he noted that some of his peers “immediately had to leave” college due to rising costs.Federal rules and ongoing legal uncertaintyUncertainty is not limited to state policies. CNBC also reported that the US Department of Education issued a rule stating that undocumented students are ineligible for certain federal educational benefits, including Pell Grants and federal student loans.
While the department emphasized that taxpayer-funded aid should be intended for eligible citizens and legal residents, the notice has already faced legal challenges and has not been implemented.High costs and narrowing of the pipeline to degreesThe financial gap between in-state and out-of-state tuition remains stark. As CNBC points out, the average in-state tuition at four-year public colleges is about $11,950, compared to $31,880 for out-of-state students. Advocates warn that such increases could force more students to abandon degree programs or transfer to community colleges. In Virginia, where a legal challenge to in-state tuition protections remains, experts told CNBC that costs could jump from about $15,000 to $60,000 annually if current protections are eliminated, a change they say would dramatically impact workforce pipelines and community stability.
