DACA In State College Tuition

A judge in Maricopa County Arizona ruled on May 5 that immigrants granted deferred deportation status are eligible for in-state college tuition. This is a state court decision that will save thousands of dollars for DREAMers attending Maricopa County Community Colleges. Arizona is often the arena for contentious immigration litigation and legislation. Maricopa County is also the home of famed anti-immigration  Sheriff Joe Arapaio. This ruling could set a precedent for other schools and other states to level in-state tuition for their students with deferred action.

The basis of Superior Court Judge Arthur Anderson’s decision is that federal law determines who is lawfully present in the United States. Arizona has a voter-enacted law, Proposition 300, which demands that individuals seeking a federal, state, or local public benefit must submit specific documentation to prove lawful presence in the United States. There are also prohibitions from Arizona’s controversial SB1070 law, which was largely but not entirety stricken down by the United States Supreme Court.

The DREAMers have been clamoring for comprehensive immigration reform that will grant them a pathway to citizenship, as long as they meet certain requirements. Their argument is that they were brought to the United States as young children and have grown up knowing themselves to be Americans. Many DREAMers are unaware of their status until they start applying for colleges and realize that they do not qualify for scholarships and federal benefits because of their status.

Deferred action is not immigration status that grants green cards or a path to citizenship. It is a temporary allowance of authorized stay without many benefits. Individuals can obtain work authorization. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) was announced on June 15, 2012 and is available for periods of two years. Expanded DACA and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) are being challenged by 26 states in Texas v. United States. The case is currently awaiting a decision in the Fifth Circuit after a federal judge in Texas blocked implementation of the programs because they were announced without following the Administrative Procedural Act’s Notice-and-Comment.