Maryland in-state tuition law faces federal lawsuit over eligibility rules

Federal case challenges Maryland tuition law

The U.S. Department of Justice filed a federal case challenging Maryland rules that give some undocumented students in-state tuition and access to state financial aid at eligible institutions.

The complaint argues Maryland cannot base lower tuition on residence unless citizens from other states receive the same benefit at those institutions when they enroll there as well.

Defendants include state education bodies

The case names the State of Maryland, the Maryland Higher Education Commission, and the University System of Maryland Board of Regents as defendants in the federal court filing.

Federal lawyers asked the United States District Court for the District of Maryland to declare the challenged rules invalid and block enforcement through permanent injunctions under federal law.

Federal lawyers cite 1996 law

The Justice Department points to Section 1623 of federal immigration law, which limits residence-based postsecondary education benefits for people without lawful status under state benefit rules like these.

The complaint argues Maryland cannot offer lower tuition through residency rules unless citizens from every state can receive the same postsecondary benefit regardless of home address at enrollment.

Maryland’s eligibility rules are detailed

Maryland rules cover qualifying students who attended secondary school in Maryland, graduated or received an equivalent diploma, and whose personal, parental, or guardian tax records meet state requirements.

Applicants also must satisfy other conditions, including steps toward permanent resident status within 30 days after federal immigration rules make that action available for tuition eligibility under law.

The policy dates back years

Lawmakers passed the Maryland DREAM Act in 2011, creating a path for qualifying students to access in-state tuition at public colleges after meeting specified conditions under state law.

The state later changed the policy through measures in 2019, 2024, and 2026, while federal lawyers argue those updates widened eligibility and reduced barriers for applicants seeking in-state rates.

Tuition savings drive the dispute

The complaint says qualifying students saved nearly $9 million in tuition costs from summer 2024 through spring 2025 under Maryland’s lower-rate policy at public colleges and universities in Maryland.

That figure remains an allegation, not a final judicial finding about program costs or taxpayer impact, because no ruling resolved it when the federal case began in court.

Fun fact: Maryland‘s first settlers landed at St. Clement’s Island on March 25, 1634, and the site is honored each year on Maryland Day.

Financial aid rules face review

Federal lawyers asked the court to stop Maryland from enforcing eligibility rules for financial aid and scholarship programs that benefit undocumented students through the challenged provisions at issue.

That request reaches beyond tuition rates and places related state-backed assistance under the same legal argument raised against Maryland’s policy as review continues during litigation in federal court.

Little-known fact: Some tuition exchange programs let eligible students pay in-state tuition rates at colleges outside their home states.

Attorney General Brown responds

Attorney General of Maryland Anthony G. Brown said his office was reviewing the complaint and planned to answer through litigation before the court issued its first formal ruling.

His response framed the law around students who grew up in local communities, completed school in Maryland, and pursued higher education opportunities for their families within the state.

House speaker defends state authority

Speaker of the Maryland House of Delegates Joseline A. Peña-Melnyk rejected the federal challenge, framing the tuition policy as a state legislative choice made through the Maryland General Assembly.

She argued Maryland set requirements for students educated in Maryland schools and that the state benefits when more residents complete higher education and prepare for employment after graduation.

Maryland joins a wider federal push

The Justice Department described the Maryland filing as its 13th lawsuit challenging in-state tuition policies for undocumented students under the same legal theory in a broader litigation effort.

Earlier cases involved Virginia, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Kentucky, Illinois, Minnesota, Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Texas, and California before Maryland joined that federal litigation sequence as another case.

Several related cases reached orders

The department cites favorable orders in Texas, Kentucky, Oklahoma, and Nebraska as part of its argument that similar rules conflict with federal law in related cases outside Maryland.

Other related cases remain pending, so the Maryland filing enters proceedings with different schedules in federal courts across several jurisdictions under review outside the state as litigation continues.

The filing did not end the law

The filing itself had not ended Maryland’s tuition law or changed eligibility rules for students covered by the statute as court proceedings began in the new federal case.

Any change depends on court orders, settlement terms, state action, or later rulings after Maryland and the other defendants respond through formal filings in the pending federal case.

Want to read more about the latest developments? Check out how California’s $321 billion budget became final as residents kept looking for relief from daily costs this year.

The court request shapes the next steps

The requested relief would affect tuition eligibility, state financial aid, and scholarship access only if the federal court grants the complaint’s demands under the challenged education rules in Maryland.

The complaint places equal access arguments for out-of-state citizens before the federal court, alongside Maryland rules for students who meet eligibility requirements during pending litigation over tuition eligibility.

Want the latest before everyone else? Check out how the student loan changes under Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act affect repayment plans and borrowing limits.

What stands out more in Maryland, the federal lawsuit challenging in-state tuition eligibility rules or the state’s long standing tuition policy? Share your thoughts.

This slideshow was made with AI assistance and human editing.

Read More From This Brand:

• Property tax cuts arrive in South Dakota as new law reshapes homeowner relief and local funding debates
• South Carolina gas plant approval puts future ratepayer risk in focus
• Social Security changes put Wyoming beneficiaries on alert as possible benefit cuts move closer