California's granting in-state tuition to illegal immigrants may face a Supreme Court challenge.

[pampango]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-court-tuition-20110521,0,1255689.story

Supreme Court may hear case on tuition breaks for illegal immigrants

California's policy of granting lower, in-state college tuition to illegal immigrants who graduate from its high schools is facing a challenge in U.S. Supreme Court from those who say it violates federal immigration law. The justices in Washington may announce as soon as Monday whether they will hear the challenge or dismiss it. They may turn it away because there is no dispute among the lower courts. It is also possible the high court could ask the Obama administration for its view before deciding.

If the Supreme Court were to hear the case and overrule California, the decision would affect 11 other states, including New York, Texas, and, most recently, Maryland, which have opted to give in-state tuition to students who are illegal immigrants.

Twelve other states have explicitly refused to grant in-state tuition to illegal immigrants. For its part, the federal government — through the Clinton, George W. Bush and Obama administrations — has taken no steps to enforce the measure.

Citing this confusion, the Washington-based Immigration Reform Law Institute appealed the California case to the Supreme Court. Kris W. Kobach, a Kansas lawyer for the institute who led efforts in Arizona and elsewhere to tighten laws against illegal immigrants, estimated that California "spends in excess of $208 million a year subsidizing the tuition of illegal immigrants."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation_for_American_Immigration_Reform

FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform) established the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) as an organization that describes itself as "America's only public interest law organization working exclusively to protect the legal rights, privileges, and property of U.S. citizens and their communities from injuries and damages caused by unlawful immigration."

In December 2007, FAIR was classified as a "hate group" by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)."

[HopeHoops]

1. So will Maryland's.

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. We've had it in Kansas for several years now

They lost the court challenge. And they tried to repeal it this year but it failed to pass in the state senate.

http://marylandreporter.com/2011/04/06/in-state-tuition-for-illegal-immigrants-in-other-states-controversial-and-led-to-lawsuits/

[Mr. Jefferson]

3. States should be free to set their own education policies.

For example: CA should be free to offer students from NJ in-state tuition rates, if, for whatever reason, they seek to attract students from NJ.

This is not a matter for the fedgov to decide.

[still_one]

4. This is about illegal immigration which is federal not state. / nt

[Mr. Jefferson]

5. Whether they are here or not, is a fedgov matter.

The question on the table relates to CA's tuition policy, which is not a fedgov matter.

[treestar]

7. The issue is charging out of state tuition to in state residents

Whether they are legal or not is not a state issue. The same reason the AZ law is wrong. A state doesn't have the legal apparatus to decide who is legal or not.

[treestar]

6. I wonder if there will be an issue of standing

An "Immigration REform law Institute" can't just appeal a decision, they have to be a party affected.