© 2024 Blaze Media LLC. All rights reserved.
Arizona Supreme Court: 'Dreamers' are not eligible for in-state tuition rates
The Arizona Supreme Court ruled Monday that DACA recipients will no longer be eligible for in-state tuition rates. More than 2,000 students with protection under the Obama-era DACA program will now be required to pay higher out-of-state tuition rates. (Joshua Lott/Getty Images)

Arizona Supreme Court: 'Dreamers' are not eligible for in-state tuition rates

Arizona "Dreamers" will no longer receive tuition breaks, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled Monday.

The justices unanimously agreed with an earlier ruling by the Arizona Court of Appeals that students covered under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program are not eligible for in-state tuition rates at Arizona state colleges and universities, KTLA-TV reported.

The case was brought forward after the Maricopa County Superior Court ruled in 2015 that DACA recipients who presented an employment authorization document and who meet state residency requirements would be eligible for in-state tuition.

More than 2,000 students with protection under the Obama-era DACA program will now be required to pay higher out-of-state tuition rates.

What's the response to the ruling?

Arizona Public Universities State Board of Regents said in a statement that it would work with current students "to help them understand the implications for tuition."

"Without a doubt, the Arizona Supreme Court’s decision today is a setback for DACA students. The Arizona Board of Regents has consistently called on Congress and President Trump to work together to design and provide relief for these students within the overall approach to immigration enforcement and reform," the statement said.

State Attorney General Mark Brnovich said his job is to uphold the law and will of the voters who passed a proposition in 2006, which called for in-state tuition and financial aid only for students with legal status.

“While people can disagree what the law should be, I hope we all can agree that the attorney general must enforce the law as it is, not as we want it to be,” Brnovich said after the ruling.

The court said it would issue an explanation of the ruling no later than May 14.

Want to leave a tip?

We answer to you. Help keep our content free of advertisers and big tech censorship by leaving a tip today.
Want to join the conversation?
Already a subscriber?