DOJ sues Virginia over in-state tuition for undocumented students

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: NBC News

Dec. 30, 2025, 2:36 PM EST


The Justice Department is suing Virginia over its policy of allowing students without legal immigration status access to in-state tuition rates at its public colleges and universities. In a lawsuit filed late Monday, the Trump administration said the Virginia Education Code “directly” conflicts with federal immigration law.

“Federal law prohibits States from providing aliens who are not lawfully present in the United States with any postsecondary education benefit that is denied to U.S. citizens,” Elianis Perez, assistant director at the Office of Immigration Litigation at DOJ, wrote. “There are no exceptions.”

According to the complaint, since 2022 Virginia law has allowed students without legal immigration status who have lived in the state for at least two years to benefit from reduced, in-state tuition rates while denying that same benefit to citizens who are not residents of Virginia.

The office of Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Similar lawsuits have been filed against other states that have comparable tuition programs.

Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/doj-sues-virginia-undocumented-in-state-tuition-rcna251554

[underpants]

1. STATES RIGHTS!!!

[BlueWaveNeverEnd]

3. Exactly!!

[AZJonnie]

2. I had a feeling she's full of shit, and she is ...

§ 1623(a) is the federal provision at issue, but the absolute framing—“there are no exceptions” full stop—glosses over the statutory qualifier (“on the basis of residence”) and the fact that states can, and do, craft eligibility rules that comply with § 1623 while still extending in‑state rates or other benefits to some undocumented students.

Courts and commentators have noted that § 1623 does not say states must deny postsecondary benefits to undocumented students across the board; it sets a condition on how residence can be used as a basis, and many states have designed in‑state tuition statutes to avoid making simple “residency” the trigger.​

For example, Arizona’s 2025 AG opinion on Proposition 308 concluded that a voter‑approved measure offering in‑state tuition to certain undocumented students based on high school attendance and graduation “confers no eligibility … on the basis of residence” and is therefore consistent with §§ 1621 and 1623

This sAdministration is such a fucking clownshow. Yet another minion hired solely for their proclivity to swing from Trump's nutsack will lose in court, AGAIN.

[no_hypocrisy]

4. That's circular logic, a fallacy instead of a valid argument.

According to the complaint, since 2022 Virginia law has allowed students without legal immigration status who have lived in the state for at least two years to benefit from reduced, in-state tuition rates while denying that same benefit to citizens who are not residents of Virginia.

OK, if the Court accepts that argument, then why allow a reduction of tuition for in-state students in any case?

Why should out-of-state students feel discriminated when they weren't going to get a reduction in tuition because . . . . they live out of state?

[TomSlick]

5. How does the US have standing?

What harm is done to the US by this policy?