Trump’s Executive Order Targets In-State Tuition for Undocumented Students in California

JB Quinnon
May 1
3 min read

A new executive order signed by President Donald Trump is drawing national attention for its potential impact on undocumented college students, particularly in California. The directive challenges state policies that allow undocumented immigrants to pay in-state tuition, framing it as unfair to out-of-state American citizens.

What the Order Says

The executive order, titled “Protecting American Communities from Criminal Aliens,” includes a provision to prohibit states from offering in-state college tuition to undocumented students while charging higher rates to U.S. citizens from other states. The order cites 8 U.S.C. § 1623, a federal law that forbids undocumented individuals from receiving postsecondary benefits based on residency unless those benefits are also available to all U.S. citizens, regardless of their state of residence. [Source: U.S. Code Title 8 § 1623 – Limitation on eligibility for preferential treatment]

California’s AB540 and Its History

California’s Assembly Bill 540 (AB540), enacted in 2001, permits nonresident students — including undocumented immigrants — to qualify for in-state tuition if they attend a California high school for at least three years and meet other requirements, such as signing an affidavit committing to legalizing their status when eligible. The policy is intended to broaden access to higher education for students who have spent years in California’s school system. [Source: California Education Code § 68130.5]

For context, in-state tuition at the University of California (UC) averages around $15,000 per year, while nonresident students can pay more than $50,000. In the California State University (CSU) system, 8,501 students — approximately 2% of total enrollment — paid in-state rates through AB540 in Fall 2024, according to CSU. [Source: San Francisco Chronicle, April 30, 2025]

Legal Standing and Past Challenges

AB540 has already withstood federal scrutiny. In Martinez v. Regents of the University of California (2010), the California Supreme Court unanimously upheld the law, finding that eligibility was based on high school attendance rather than legal residency — a distinction that made it consistent with federal law. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case the following year. [Source: Martinez v. Regents, 50 Cal. 4th 1277 (2010)]

Kevin R. Johnson, Dean of UC Davis School of Law and co-author of a recent DACA study, explained that courts have consistently ruled in-state tuition is not a “public benefit” under federal law, but a result of long-term educational participation. [Source: San Francisco Chronicle interview, April 30, 2025]

Political and Economic Impact

The Trump administration’s directive also aligns with a broader campaign to penalize institutions perceived as liberal. Past actions have included withholding federal research funds, revoking international student visas, and launching investigations into elite universities such as Harvard, Columbia, and UC Berkeley. [Source: San Francisco Chronicle, April 30, 2025]

Advocates argue the executive order will disproportionately hurt students who have grown up in the U.S., contribute to local economies, and aspire to professional careers. “Without the help that we get from paying in-state tuition, most of us would not have the ability to attend such a prestigious school,” said an undocumented student at UC Berkeley, who requested anonymity. [Source: San Francisco Chronicle]

What’s Ahead?

Despite the rhetoric, California’s law remains in effect — and legal experts believe the state has a strong defense based on judicial precedent. However, the Trump administration’s willingness to invoke federal racketeering laws (RICO statutes) as a form of enforcement marks a new and aggressive tactic.

This challenge could have sweeping implications for nearly 1 million undocumented students nationwide, including DACA recipients. If successful, the order could discourage states from maintaining inclusive tuition policies and restrict access to higher education for thousands of qualified students.

Sources: