Undocumented immigrants in Minnesota who meet certain requirements can continue to qualify for in-state tuition and financial aid, after a federal judge on Friday, March 27, dismissed a suit challenging the 13-year-old law.
In a news release, Attorney General Keith Ellison said he was proud that his office had defended state law from Donald Trump’s attempts to make Minnesota “a colder, less caring state.” He said allowing more Minnesotans to pursue and attain college degrees provides a long-term benefit for students as well as their communities.
“The Minnesota Legislature decided that it’s a necessary investment for our state to do everything we can to encourage a more educated workforce, and that kids who have grown up here and succeeded in attending and graduating from Minnesota high schools should be eligible for in-state tuition at our public colleges and universities,” he said.
The case, brought by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, alleged that Minnesota has been providing in-state tuition to undocumented Minnesota residents while failing to provide this same benefit to U.S. citizens who don’t live in Minnesota — which the Justice Department said is a violation of federal law.
But U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez rejected that argument in her Friday ruling. She found that the federal law did not preempt the state law, because Minnesota law does not grant in-state tuition on the basis of residence.
Instead, people qualify for in-state tuition by attending a Minnesota high school for three years and graduating from a state high school. Undocumented students must also submit proof they have applied for legal status, if such a pathway exists. This qualification process may include students who are not Minnesota residents (for example, those who attend and graduate from high school in Minnesota, though they live across the state line, or out-of-state students who attend Minnesota boarding schools) and exclude Minnesota residents who don’t meet those requirements.
In the 2023-2024 school year, about 500 students received state grants under the Minnesota Dream Act, the law that allows some undocumented immigrants to qualify for in-state tuition. That number makes up less than 1% of all Minnesota applicants for financial aid. Some of the students who received funds under the Minnesota Dream Act may have Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), Temporary Protected Status, or another form of legal status.
The federal law in question, which dates from the presidential administration of Bill Clinton, states that “an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a State (or a political subdivision) for any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit (in no less an amount, duration, and scope) without regard to whether the citizen or national is such a resident.”
But Menendez wrote that this law does not preempt the Minnesota statute, because the state law does not have a causal link to residency.
She also said that the requirement in federal law that a citizen or national to be eligible for a benefit without regard to residency did not require all citizens or nationals to be eligible for that benefit.
“Based on the text and precedent, the use of ‘a’ in §1623 means ‘one’ or ‘any,’” she wrote. “Let’s start with the word’s plain meaning. Colloquially, ‘a’ is singular.”
At a December court hearing on the case, youth leaders with Communities Organizing Latine Power and Action (COPAL) expressed hope that the laws allowing higher education pathways to undocumented students would stand.
“If this were to be removed, it would just destroy a really huge pathway, to not only attend [college], but also get into careers,” said Vshin Yang.
“It definitely has been something that a lot of my friends have needed to be able to go to school,” Giselle Martinez-Izea said. “I’d say it’s especially important in the right for undocumented students and students in general to be able to receive higher education.”
The youth leaders were not immediately available for comment late Friday afternoon.
Menendez dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning the Department of Justice cannot file a similar case again. The Department of Justice did not immediately respond to a request for comment, and it’s not clear whether the agency will appeal.
