DOJ tuition lawsuits put state aid for undocumented students at risk

12 states have now faced Justice Department lawsuits over policies that let eligible undocumented students pay in-state college tuition, according to the provided reports. The latest cases target Massachusetts and Rhode Island, while related fights in Kansas and other states show a national legal campaign moving through federal courts. For students, the stakes are immediate: the gap between resident and nonresident tuition can reach tens of thousands of dollars a year.

The Bottom Line

• The DOJ sued Massachusetts and Rhode Island over in-state tuition, financial aid and scholarship access for eligible undocumented students.
• The latest cases bring the administration's total to 12 state lawsuits over similar policies.
• Texas, Kentucky, Oklahoma and Nebraska have already ended comparable policies after federal challenges.
• Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell plans to defend her state's law, while Rhode Island officials have also promised a defense.
• In Kansas, students and Gov. Laura Kelly are seeking to intervene after the attorney general agreed to a proposed consent decree.

Breaking It Down

The federal campaign centers on a 1996 law cited in the Rhode Island case. The DOJ argues that a person who is not lawfully present cannot receive a postsecondary education benefit based on state residence unless U.S. citizens from other states can receive the same benefit. The department says state tuition laws conflict with that federal restriction and has asked courts to block them.

Massachusetts' case targets the state's 2023 Tuition Equity Law. The law allows qualifying students to receive in-state rates after attending a Massachusetts high school for at least three years, regardless of legal status. The federal challenge in Massachusetts also names scholarship and financial aid programs available to non-citizen students.

Rhode Island faces a similar suit covering in-state tuition, state aid and scholarships. The financial difference is substantial. At the University of Rhode Island, the reported annual tuition gap is $21,666: $15,684 for in-state students versus $37,350 for out-of-state students. Rhode Island College shows an $8,569 gap, while the Community College of Rhode Island charges full-time out-of-state students $5,108 more per semester.

States are not responding in the same way. Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell plans to defend the state law. Rhode Island's attorney general's office said it would aggressively defend state laws. In Kansas, Gov. Laura Kelly moved to intervene after Attorney General Kris Kobach agreed to a proposed consent decree that would stop enforcement of a law in place for more than 20 years. A student group, Kansas Students for Affordable Tuition, is also seeking to join that case.

Why This Matters

The lawsuits could reshape who can afford public college in multiple states. The Rhode Island tuition case reaches beyond sticker prices because students may also lose access to programs such as the Promise Scholarship at CCRI and the Hope Scholarship at Rhode Island College.

The broader impact reaches U.S. citizens as well because the DOJ's argument is built around unequal treatment between undocumented state residents and American students who live elsewhere. The department says reduced tuition cannot be offered to one group while out-of-state U.S. citizens pay higher rates. States defending the laws argue that they are expanding educational opportunity for young people who attended local schools and built their lives in those communities.

The legal outcomes are already mixed. Four states ended their policies after federal action, while Minnesota previously succeeded in having the DOJ's lawsuit dismissed, according to Inside Higher Ed. That split means the same type of student may face very different tuition rules depending on the state and the outcome of federal litigation.

What Comes Next

Federal courts will decide whether the Massachusetts and Rhode Island policies can remain in force. In Kansas, a court must still approve the proposed consent decree, while Kelly and the student group are seeking a role in defending the law.

Additional cases remain pending in California, New Jersey, Illinois, Virginia, Kansas and Minnesota. The next major developments will come from court rulings, state intervention requests and any decisions to settle or continue defending the challenged laws.