Articles

We are told that the American Dream is ours for the taking. As children, we’re advised to stay in school, earn good grades, strive for a high school diploma, and go to college. Our hard work, we are promised, will pay off. Our dreams are within reach if we try hard enough.

Ernesto’s dream is to major in political science at the University of Maryland and become a lawyer who will advocate on behalf of his community. “My community has many needs,” says Ernesto (who asked that his real name not be used), “and I would like to make things better.” As a junior in high school, he juggled three Advanced Placement courses Spanish, biology, and literature. This fall, Ernesto began his senior year in high school, and soon his school in Maryland will be bustling with college recruiters and fast-approaching deadlines for college admissions. As his friends and classmates begin to weigh their college options, Ernesto, an immigrant lacking legal status, will be forced to watch from the sidelines.

Although Ernesto has lived in the U.S. since the age of three, he is undocumented. He has little recollection of Guatemala, the country where he was born, and considers himself an American. He and his family have lived in Maryland for the past 13 years, but Ernesto will have to pay the out-of-state tuition rate$13,336 as opposed to $4,572 for in-state tuitionto attend the University of Maryland. The cost is great, particularly given that Ernesto is not eligible for state, federal, and most private financial support, due to his immigration status. As a result, Ernesto will effectively be denied the opportunity to go to college.

The Problem

In 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states could not deny undocumented immigrant children access to a free public K-12 education (Plyer v. Doe). To do so would violate the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. But no such protections apply to undocumented students seeking to enroll in U.S. public colleges and universities. Instead, restrictions have been adopted to limit their access to higher education.

In the mid-1990s, an era marked by the leadership of House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA), immigrants suffered many legislative setbacks. Congress passed both the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA)two laws that imposed massive restrictions on access to public benefit programs for immigrants, including legal immigrants. Section 505 of IIRIRA prohibits undocumented immigrants from accessing “any post-secondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit.” As a result, many states have blocked access to in-state tuition for undocumented students in their state, fearing that federal law would require them to allow a U.S. citizen residing in another state to pay instate tuition and, in turn, impose great costs on the state. But there are hidden costs to this policy.

The Cost

An estimated 60,000 undocumented students graduate from our nation’s high schools each year, according to the Urban Institute. Access to in-state tuition, state and federal financial assistance, and private scholarships often proves to be elusive or unattainable for these students, rendering a college education unaffordable and out of reach.

Affected students include class valedictorians, honor students, star athletes, and class presidents. Many have gained acceptance into some of the nation’s most prestigious universities. Some are bilingual, while others speak only English. All are students who, if given the chance to invest further in themselves, could become our muchneeded teachers, nurses, and community leaders.

Closing the door to college sends all immigrant students a contradictory message about the importance of graduating from high school and results in a waste of human potential and of an investment that we have already made into their K-12 education. Aside from the thousands of students who graduate from high school, there are those students who recognize this contradiction, see little point in working toward college, and drop out of school. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, foreign-born Latino dropouts account for 26 percent of all dropouts in the U.S. The human cost is great.


In addition, the economic ramifications are significant. According to a Rand Corporation report, if we increased college completion rates of today’s Hispanic 18-year-olds by as little as 3 percent, we would increase projected social insurance payments, such as Medicare contributions, by $600 million. By conservative estimates, the investments made now into these students’ college education would be repaid by their higher tax contributions within four years after they have entered the workforce. Their prosperity is indeed our prosperity.

The Response

In some states, responses to federal laws on this issue have begun to shift recently. For example, in June 2001, Texas became the first state to offer in-state tuition for immigrant students who have graduated from a Texas high school, lived in Texas for at least three years, and pledged to apply for legal permanent resident status. Six other states have since followed suitCalifornia, Utah, New York, Washington, Illinois, and Oklahomaand an additional 15 states have introduced such legislation, including Georgia, Nebraska, North Carolina, and Kansas.

The fact that states like Utah, Georgia, and Nebraska are fighting the same battle being fought in Texas, California, and New Yorktraditional immigrant statesindicates that this is not a regional issue. It is a growing national issue requiring federal action.

There are several bills before Congress that address the challenges faced by these students. In the Senate, bipartisan legislation sponsored by Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Richard Durbin (D-IL), known as the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act of 2003, S 1545, would repeal Section 505, the federal provision that discourages states from providing instate tuition to undocumented students, and would provide a pathway to U.S. citizenship for students who meet certain criteria. Similar bills have been proposed in the House, with the most prominent being the Student Adjustment Act, HR 1684, sponsored by Representatives Chris Cannon (R-UT), Howard Berman (DCA), and Lucille Roybal-Allard (DCA). Both bills enjoy strong bipartisan support.

Like most bills related to immigrants, the DREAM Act and Student Adjustment Act encounter opposition from anti-immigrant groups and have been marked as “controversial” in the mainstream press. Yet, this issue is less related to immigration and more fundamentally connected to education. It is about opening the doors to education, rather than closing them, and about educating all our children, rather than just some. Let us not punish our children for being in a situation that they had little control over, but fulfill the promise of the American Dream for those, like Ernesto, who have worked hard and dared to dream of a life of opportunity in the U.S.

What the Bills Would Do

The DREAM Act, S 1545, and the Student Adjustment Act, HR 1684, would both repeal Section 505 of IIRIRA, facilitating state efforts to offer in-state tuition rates to U.S.-raised immigrant students. In addition, both bills would provide immigration relief to individuals who meet certain criteria. In the DREAM Act, immigrant students may adjust their status to that of a legal permanent resident on a conditional basis for six years if they:

• arrived in the U.S. before age 16; and
• have been accepted for admission into a two- or four-year institution of higher education, or have earned a high school diploma or a General Education Development (GED) certificate at the time of application for relief; and
• have resided in the U.S. for at least five years preceding the date of the law’s enactment; and
• have demonstrated good moral character, a defined term in immigration law, and have no criminal record.

The conditional basis upon which legal permanent residence was granted will be removed and become permanent once the individual has fulfilled one of the following within six years:


• earned a degree from an institution of higher education (two- or four-year institution);
• maintained good standing, for at least two years, at an institution of higher education while working toward a bachelor’s degree or higher;
• served in the U.S. Armed Forces for at least two years; or
• performed at least 910 hours of volunteer community service.

Melissa Lazarin is Education Policy Analyst for the National Council of La Raza in Washington, D.C.

Reprinted with permission from NETWORK, a National Catholic Social Justice Lobby, 801 Pennsylvania Ave., SE, Suite 460, Washington, DC 20003. For membership information, call 202-547-5556.