- The DOJ tuition lawsuits could force DACA-eligible students to pay nonresident tuition if courts block state residency benefits.
- At least six states are involved, including Colorado, where the ASSET Act faces legal challenge over tuition and aid.
- Illinois already saw enforcement blocked after Judge David W. Dugan ruled the state’s tuition laws unconstitutional and invalid.
The DOJ tuition lawsuits filed in 2026 could force some DACA-eligible students to pay nonresident tuition and lose state aid if courts block residency-based benefits. The legal fight now spans at least six states, with Colorado’s ASSET Act among the laws under challenge.
The immediate risk is financial. Students who qualify for in-state rates could face higher tuition bills, while scholarships and state financial aid tied to the same eligibility rules could disappear.
Colorado illustrates the stakes. The challenged law lets certain undocumented students who meet residency and high-school requirements pay in-state tuition and receive state financial aid. A court loss could sharply increase costs for students who currently rely on those provisions.
The federal government argues that these benefits violate federal law because states do not offer them on identical terms to every U.S. citizen, including citizens who live outside the state. Courts must decide whether the state programs can survive that challenge.
The legal campaign accelerated this summer. The Justice Department sued Maryland on July 17, 2026, and Colorado on July 23, 2026. It targeted New York, Connecticut, and Vermont on August 10, 2026.
Illinois has already suffered a court defeat. On July 29, 2026, Judge David W. Dugan ruled the state’s RISE Act and Illinois DREAM Act, along with the in-state tuition law, “unconstitutional and invalid” and enjoined enforcement.
Illinois ruling puts enrolled students under pressure
The Illinois decision shows how quickly the consequences can reach students already attending college. Where an injunction takes effect, students may need to pay nonresident rates immediately or after the court order becomes effective.
The effect varies by state. Some laws expressly include DACA recipients, while others cover undocumented students more broadly. Students in both categories may depend on the challenged residency rules for tuition or aid.
| State or group of states | Development | Potential student effect |
|---|---|---|
| Maryland | DOJ lawsuit filed July 17, 2026 | In-state tuition and related aid could face disruption if the law is blocked |
| Colorado | DOJ lawsuit filed July 23, 2026 | Students meeting residency and high-school requirements could lose resident rates and state aid |
| Illinois | Judge David W. Dugan ruled on July 29, 2026 | Enforcement of the RISE Act, Illinois DREAM Act, and in-state tuition law was enjoined |
| New York, Connecticut, and Vermont | Targeted August 10, 2026 | Students relying on challenged residency rules face uncertainty while litigation proceeds |
States still defending their policies, including California, leave students waiting for court decisions before they know whether existing benefits will remain available. The uncertainty can affect both current enrollees and students planning to start college under resident-rate assumptions.
The lawsuits also create different exposure depending on how each state writes its rules. A statute that grants benefits specifically to DACA recipients could lose those provisions directly. A broader law for undocumented students could produce the same result for DACA recipients who qualify through the general residency framework.
Students may also face a second loss beyond tuition classification. When state aid and scholarship programs use the same eligibility standards, blocking the tuition statute can remove access to both forms of assistance.
The Illinois ruling provides the clearest current example of the federal strategy. Other cases could determine whether states may continue offering resident tuition and financial aid to students who meet state requirements but lack citizenship or permanent-resident status.
The lawsuits remain active in Maryland, Colorado, New York, Connecticut, Vermont, and other states still fighting. Each court order could change the price of attendance before a student completes a degree.
