Advocates Say Texas Guidance on Undocumented Tuition Remains Murky

(TEXAS) Texas public colleges and universities are racing to comply with a federal court order that ended in-state tuition for most undocumented students, while campus leaders, students, and advocates say state guidance has left major gaps. On June 4, 2025, U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor permanently blocked the 24-year-old Texas Dream Act after the Texas Attorney General and the U.S. Department of Justice jointly asked the court to halt the policy during ongoing litigation.

The ruling immediately reshaped higher education finance in the state. According to state estimates cited by higher education advocates, more than 57,000 current students lost eligibility for in-state tuition in a single stroke, and nearly 200,000 high school students projected to graduate over the next several years face steep price increases if they enroll in Texas colleges under out-of-state rates. The decision touches every public campus and thousands of families who built plans around the now-blocked law.

State directive and campus response

The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) responded by directing college presidents to identify students who are not “lawfully present” and reclassify them as non-residents for tuition, starting in fall 2025. Commissioner Wynn Rosser’s letter instructed institutions to review students who previously qualified for in-state tuition under the Texas Dream Act and to charge them out-of-state rates moving forward.

University leaders say the order set off a rush to figure out who falls under the new rules. Most Texas campuses do not collect immigration status during admissions. Students are not required to disclose citizenship or provide Social Security numbers to apply, and many have never shared this information with their schools.

Without a standard state method, colleges worry about:

• Inconsistent decisions across institutions and departments
• Errors that could trigger appeals or legal risk
• Wrongful classification of students

Advocates warn the state’s guidance offers few practical steps and raises privacy worries. They fear colleges may feel pressure to seek documents students rarely provide to schools, or worse, consult immigration authorities.

“The message is already chilling,” say groups serving immigrant youth. Some students who remain eligible for in-state tuition because they are lawfully present—such as DACA recipients, Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders, or certain parolees—now fear they could be flagged anyway if they disclose sensitive data.

Several campuses have told student groups they will not proactively collect new immigration paperwork until the state provides clearer rules. Others are drafting internal procedures but remain concerned about uneven practices across departments and the potential for bias. College financial aid offices, registrars, and legal teams are coordinating under tight timelines, with appeals and deadlines for tuition classification looming.

Implementation questions from THECB directive

THECB’s directive sets a broad goal—reclassify non-lawfully present students—but does not prescribe a uniform method. Administrators say they need answers on:

• Acceptable evidence of lawful presence
• Verification timelines
• Handling mid-year changes in status
• What to do when a student seeks review without revealing immigration status

The uncertainty is especially hard for mixed-status families, where siblings may fall under different rules depending on age and federal protections.

Under the current approach, only students who are “lawfully present” in the United States can still receive in-state tuition if they meet Texas residency rules. That pool includes certain groups like DACA recipients and TPS holders. But the number of students with DACA is shrinking because the federal government has not accepted new applications for years.

Students with DACA can refer to the official USCIS resource for guidance: https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/consideration-of-deferred-action-for-childhood-arrivals-daca. However, campus classification decisions rest on state residency and institutional policies as shaped by the court order.

Financial and educational impacts

For students who grew up in Texas schools and planned for college under the Texas Dream Act, the shift is more than a line on a bill. In-state tuition is often half—or less—of out-of-state rates. Losing it can:

• Push a community college path out of reach
• Force students to reduce credits
• Delay graduation
• Cause students to leave school altogether

Financial aid offices can offer payment plans, scholarship searches, and appeals processes, but these tools rarely offset the full cost jump.

Advocacy groups and higher education leaders argue the policy will undercut the state’s workforce. Texas has spent decades building college pipelines through K-12 investments and regional job programs. If fewer students enroll or complete degrees, employers in nursing, teaching, engineering, and skilled trades could feel the pinch within a few years.

Business groups that once supported the Texas Dream Act cite the long-term costs of reducing the number of trained workers in a fast-growing economy.

Human impact and campus efforts

The personal stress is immediate. Students describe:

• Confusion about whether they must disclose immigration details
• Fear that a mistaken classification could expose them or family members
• Worry about losing housing if they drop below full-time status

First-generation students, who often rely on campus advisors to plan course loads and costs, now navigate complex questions their schools cannot yet answer. According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, the policy shift is creating a wave of urgent advising requests across Texas campuses, with staff seeking clearer rules to prevent case-by-case missteps.

Student groups report that some classmates who remain eligible for in-state tuition because they are lawfully present are stepping back from enrollment anyway. They fear being asked for proof they don’t have on hand or being misidentified during hurried reviews. That chilling effect extends to asylum seekers and parolees who hold legal status but worry their documents will be misunderstood by staff in a new, high-pressure system.

Colleges are trying to stabilize the moment. Common campus efforts include:

• Updating websites with guidance and FAQs
• Holding town halls and information sessions
• Training staff to handle sensitive conversations
• Setting up a single point of contact to reduce repeated disclosures
• Advising students to keep copies of any documents they submit and to request written decisions on tuition classification

Financial aid directors also recommend students ask how their school stores data and who has access.

Policy group recommendations

Policy and advocacy groups urge the state to issue detailed, privacy-aware steps that reduce guesswork. Suggested measures include:

• A standard affidavit process to limit document exposure
• Clear timelines for classification and reclassification
• A statewide appeals path that does not force students to reveal more than necessary
• A rule barring colleges from sharing sensitive information with outside agencies unless required by law

These steps are intended to reduce fear and promote continuity for students who remain eligible for in-state rates.

Practical questions still unanswered

Many operational questions remain urgent for institutions and students alike:

1. How should schools handle returning students who skipped a term due to cost?
2. What proof of lawful presence is acceptable, and who reviews it?
3. Will mid-year federal status changes allow reclassification to in-state tuition?
4. How will colleges protect student data while meeting audit and reporting duties?

Without clearer rules, universities face uneven implementation and potential legal disputes. For students, the clock is ticking toward payment deadlines and class registration holds.

As fall 2025 approaches, the gap between policy and process is where real harm can occur—missed semesters, lost scholarships tied to full-time status, and momentum that is hard to regain once broken.

Texas education leaders, advocates, and families are watching for updated state guidance, along with any further court actions that could adjust the timeline. For now, the reality is stark: the Texas Dream Act is blocked, colleges must reclassify most undocumented students as non-residents, and thousands of young people must decide quickly whether they can afford to stay on campus or need to change course.