Key Resources and Messaging Guidance on In-State Tuition Executive Order 

May 2025

Below, find relevant resources, background points of emphasis and context, and suggested messaging toplines regarding the in-state tuition language included in the April 28, 2025 Executive Order (E.O.):

Resources: 

• White House text of E.O. (4/28/25)
• Joint TDUS & PA Reaction Statement (4/28/25)
• Inside Higher Ed article, “Executive Order Targets Undocumented Students’ In-State Tuition” (5/2/25)
• Texas Immigration Law Council 1-pager assessing Executive Order (May 2025)
• FWD.us explainer: “In-State Tuition for Dreamers & Undocumented Students Benefits Us All: What to know about the federal government’s unlawful attack on in-state tuition“

Background Points of Emphasis: Below is helpful context about the E.O. and implications:

• Plan, but don’t panic. We’re urging everyone to take a breath, resist panic, and avoid making abrupt policy changes or public statements that may inadvertently legitimize an unlawful and harmful directive, and may spread undue fear among students and prospective students.

• Federal law does not prohibit states from allowing undocumented students to pay in-state tuition rates. Instead, Section 505 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) says that states can’t give in-state tuition based on residency to undocumented students unless they offer the same benefit to U.S. citizens in similar situations, regardless of residency. 

• Nothing has changed. The states that offer in-state tuition to undocumented students have fully complied with this law. 

• Legally dubious -– federal overreach that violates states’ rights. The E.O. language suggesting punitive actions against states that support higher education access for Dreamers does not mean such actions are legal, feasible, or inevitable.
  • States have long held the authority to determine in-state tuition policies based on their unique needs, priorities, and values.
  • The E.O. represents a troubling example of federal overreach, something that courts have rejected.
    • Martinez v. Regents of the University of California 
    • Day v. Sebelius
  • As Monica Andrade, an attorney and Director of State Policy and Legal Strategy at the Presidents’ Alliance, noted: “For decades, states have had the clear authority to establish criteria for purposes of in-state tuition. In line with this authority, many states have passed laws that permit students, including undocumented students who have graduated from state high schools, to access in-state tuition rates. These laws recognize the deep ties these students have to their states and communities, and the critical importance of postsecondary education to workforce development and civic participation.”

Messaging Points of Emphasis: While we do not recommend rushing to issue a public statement or proactively and immediately communicating with Dreamers who may be affected, we do encourage that any public-facing messaging include some or all of the following:

• Reject the attempt to divide us. The E.O. is intentionally designed to stoke fear and create a false divide between“American citizens” and “Dreamers”, a false distinction to our eyes and one that won’t work:
  • As Gaby Pacheco of TheDream.US noted, “Dreamers are Americans in all but their paperwork. The average TheDream.US Scholar arrived in the U.S. at just four years old. Dreamers have grown up here, sat next to U.S. citizens in classrooms, played on the same sports teams, and are deeply woven into the fabric of their communities. Americans know better — and they know Dreamers are part of us.”
    • Of note, solidarity messaging and stories of U.S. citizen students speaking up for and alongside their undocumented friends and classmates would be powerful if and when helpful and appropriate to feature.

• Focus on the broader harms of blocking Dreamers’ opportunities. Denying Dreamers access to higher education harms not only the students themselves, but also their campuses, communities, and the current and future workforce needs of our nation.
  • For compelling stories, data, and insights, see TheDream.US 10-Year Impact Report. It highlights how expanding higher education and career opportunities for Dreamers strengthens communities, enriches workplaces, and benefits the country as a whole: https://thedream.us/impact/impact-report-2025 

• Emphasize the moral and human costs. This E.O. politicizes the futures of young people in deeply cruel and harmful ways.
  • Unlike their U.S.-born classmates, Dreamers cannot access federal financial aid, making In-state tuition often the only viable path to pursue their education and fulfill their potential. 
  • Denying Dreamers access to in-state tuition would slam the door on their futures — and on the valuable contributions they are already making to America.

The post Key Resources and Messaging Guidance on In-State Tuition Executive Order  appeared first on TheDream.US.