Students sue for tuition parity with California illegals By Joyce Howard Price THE WASHINGTON TIMES December 15, 2005 Students from 19 states yesterday filed a class-action lawsuit seeking hundreds of millions of dollars from California officials for charging them significantly more than illegal aliens pay to attend state-run colleges. The 42 plaintiffs say California state lawmakers and the University of California board of regents knowingly violated a federal law enacted in 1996 that says any state that offers discounted in-state tuition to its illegal aliens must provide the same lower rates to all U.S. citizens. California has a "unique" statute barring discrimination on the basis of geographic origin, said lead attorney Michael J. Brady. Some students in the University of California system could be eligible for as much as $300,000 in total damages, he said. The plaintiffs' attorneys say the lawsuit was filed in a state court in Yolo County on behalf of about 60,000 U.S. citizens who have paid out-of-state tuition to attend public higher-education institutions in California since 2002. Link to the rest of the article:http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20051214-115702-9460r.htm This article really caught my attention!!
Good for them! Put an end to this servile truckling--an insult to all who bothered to come here legally! Of course, it's cold comfort to get this from the Moonie Times... Carthage must be destroyed.
I hope that the lawsuit succeeds. The UC and CSU systems history of discrimination in favor of illegals goes well beyond tuition. Both systems have never required applicants to disclose whether they were in this country legally. The universities considered that question a violation of their applicants' privacy. But both systems have never had any hesitation about asking applicants to state their race/ethnicity. No privacy violation there. It's true that they say that the question is purely voluntary and there's a 'decline to state' box. But what they don't tell you is that the 'decline to states' are lumped in with the whites. And until recently at least, certain favored ethnicities were given preference in admissions. (Interestingly, Chinese are considered white in that regard, but people with Spanish surnames aren't whites, even if they have blond hair and come from Spain.) Bottom line: for many years, and to some extent even today, illegals with politically favored ethnicities have often been given preference in statewide university admissions over native-born and legal-resident whites and Asians.
I also hope the lawsuit is a success. When I first went to college in California, I had to pay full tuition prices for out-of-state people. Why should someone whose mere presence is prohibited by law be allowed to pay in-state tuition prices? That is a classic example of a bassackwards law. Kudos to those who initiated the lawsuit.
The statute is: "8 U.S.C.A. § 1623 "Title 8. Aliens and Nationality "Chapter 14. Restricting Welfare and Public Benefits for Aliens "Subchapter II. Eligibility for State and Local Public Benefits Programs "§ 1623. Limitation on eligibility for preferential treatment of aliens not lawfully present on basis of residence for higher education benefits "(a) In general "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a State (or a political subdivision) for any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit (in no less an amount, duration, and scope) without regard to whether the citizen or national is such a resident. "(b) Effective date "This section shall apply to benefits provided on or after July 1, 1998." I don't know whether it creates a private right of action. It comes from the We Hate Immigrants Act of 1996 much of which is directed at the U.S. Department of Justice. It may be that the penalty to the State will be to lose federal funding eligibility or something. It will be interesting to see what happens.
Yes, it is preposterous. Foreign students with an F1 visa have to pay two or three times in state tuition, plus mandatory medical insurance in order to study in the States. They are in fact promoting ilegal immigration with those policies. In fact I am considering going to America as a tourist and burn my passport once I am there, then get a mastrer or a PhD three times cheaper, and return then home. Olé Governator!
Whew! New assignment is incredibly difficult! Need a break! Moonie Times? This story has been on the news for the past two days now. Yes, it's not fair, not fair at all. Of course, how much in America really is fair? The death penalty is not--blacks are executed far more than whites. Taxes are not fair. The rich get most of the breaks. Education is not fair. Students whose parents make huge donations to their children's schools get "good grades." Jocks who can't spell fifth grade words, speak third grade English, or perform fourth grade math are given full scholarships to college while the poor who want to go, can't, in many cases. People who have worked hard all their lives have their homes taken away so yacht clubs can be built and business can move in. Christmas trees are now holiday trees, Christmas break is now winter break, the baby Jesus is now the holiday child, and on and on and on! Etc., etc., etc., etc.
I am interested to see that one of the lawyers is a law professor. I ought to send him an e mail about the private right question.
I don't think out of state students have a leg to stand on. They don't pay taxes here in our state - if they want, they can stay in their own states for subsidized education. As far as allowing illegals - it is interesting - althought frankly a lot of resident aliens pay taxes into the states coffers. Out of state residents don't pay squat. Want to go to UC and you are from Nevada? Pay the tuition or go to UNLV -- it is pretty much that simple. Personally, I would put priority at all state colleges and universities as follows: 1. Citizens over 35 who have paid property taxes (they pay for a majority of school operations) for the last 10 years. 2. All other citizens over 35 who have paid taxes in CA for 10 or more years. 3. Children of #1 and #2 at the bottom of the list - foreign students. Lets face it - in CA, very little money comes from the federal government. As a matter of fact, for every dollar the states sends off to the FEDS, only 88 cents comes back. That is in stark contrast to Wyoming and Texas when it is something like a 1.20 to 1 (doesn't surprise me --- shouldn't surprise anyone really)
I think you are missing the point..Why illegal foreign students should get a cheaper ride then those students here legally, just reside out of state? I think not the law should be consistent, I don't think that out of state students should get subsidized education on the California tax payers but neither should illegal immigrants. If california is going to reward illegal's with such a perk then they should allow out of state citizens the same rights as people who break the law. Come on why should we reward illegals for crossing the border? There are legal ways to get here. Also linking property taxes to discounted tuition put the disadvantaged at a further disadvantage. If you can't afford a house how do you pay property taxes? So should the child of a single parent not get resident tuition because his or her parent can not afford a house and rent instead?
There's federal law. 8 USCA 1623. Nosborne already posted the text. The smallest of the University of Californias, UC San Francisco, received $593 million in public research funding last year. I'm sure that most of that was federal money. The doctoral research universities are heavily subsidized by the federal government.
Tim already mentioned a possible equity issue associated with #1. How about those that pay significantly lower property taxes because of prop 13? My parents have a $500 property tax bill, as opposed to my neighbor who has a $3000 property tax bill. Similar homes, parents have lived there for over 30 years, their neighbors have been there for just over a year. However, out-of-staters do not contribute anything to the economy outside of sales taxes and related fees associated with vacationing, visits family and/or friends. It's the people who pay income (and to a lesser extent) property taxes which do. In that case, I would rather have an illegal alien (using a bum SSN and paying income taxes) getting in-state rates over a person from another state who does not. All state universities aim to bring in at least some foreign students because they usually pay cash and not rely on financial aid. So as much as one may like to put foreign students at the bottom of the list, it simply will not happen because some students will always be more desirable (from a cash flow standpoint) than others. Also, federal student grants and loans are considered federal money. So technically, many of the CSUs and UCs rely significantly on federal funding. If CA does lose maybe the Governor will declare a state of emergency in an aim to cover the costs of the federal government neglecting to do its job. It should be the exact amount of any judgment against them.
Perhaps the one difference could be that out-of-state residents tend to go back out of state whereas undocumented persons tend to stay living here. It is in California's best interest to have a well-educated workforce. The related issue is some of the propositions from 1990s that attempted to stop people from getting an education in California because they were here illegally. Umm, those folks are here and they are not going to leave. Education or no education, they are not going to leave. Feel free to say what you want, but my preference is to educate folks. Particularly since they are *not* going to leave. Tom Nixon
Wrong! Out-of-state students do pay California taxes once they move to California, just as illegal aliens pay taxes once they move to California. Since illegial aliens pay California taxes once they are in California, does that legitimize their argument?
There's a huge point that you're missing...you're only considered "in state" once you've lived in California for 12 months. My wife moved to California as a resident from NY years back to live and go to school and had to pay out-of-state tuition rates until she was in CA for a year, while illegals who had recently arrived received preferential rates. This is the kind of inequity that infuriates me - how do we let someone who is a lawful citizen take a backseat to someone who enters and stays illegally? Cheers, Mark
Yes, and after one or two years (depending on the state) in residence these students can, in fact, apply for in-state residency rates. Also, illegal aliens don't come for the education (primarilly), they come for the work.
Have you ever participated in competitive sports? Those "jocks" earn their scholarships. And I really doubt that a significant number of student athletes really have that poor academic skills. Certainly not my sister"s experience. (2005 AVCA All-American).
