The Backlash Against Favoring Illegal Immigrants in Education
Imagine being a hardworking American-born student, paying your way through college with dreams of a brighter future, only to discover that the school system is giving huge discounts to kids who entered the country illegally. That’s the raw frustration fueling a growing civil rights battle in Colorado. A watchdog group called the Equal Protection Project is demanding that the U.S. Justice Department investigate a state law known as Advancing Students for a Stronger Tomorrow, or ASSET, which slashes tuition for undocumented immigrants. They argue it’s blatantly unfair, handing out benefits like in-state rates and financial aid—reserved for kids who’ve lived in the state for just a year after high school—that aren’t available to out-of-state Americans. It’s not just about paperwork; it’s about who gets a leg up in life when taxpayer dollars are on the line. William Jacobson, the project’s founder and president, puts it bluntly: these programs create a two-tier system where law-breaking foreigners get perks denied to citizens who’ve played by the rules their whole lives. Picture the scene in everyday America—parents scraping together savings for their kids’ education, watching as schools bend over backward for others. This isn’t just policy; it’s personal, stirring up resentments that cut deep across communities.
Digging deeper, the Equal Protection Project isn’t new to this fight. They’ve been spotlighting how universities across the U.S. pump out scholarships exclusively for undocumented students or those under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, effectively elbowing out American kids. The complaint to the Justice Department’s Division of Civil Rights points out that federal law already draws a clear line: higher education shouldn’t dole out special treatment to illegal immigrants that Americans can’t claim. Jacobson shared with me—well, through a reporter—how they stumbled onto this while scrutinizing what looked like racially exclusive scholarships at Colorado’s Metropolitan State University. Some of those funds were tied directly to ASSET participants, turning what should be equal opportunity into exclusionary favors. It’s a reminder of how these seemingly progressive policies can undermine the very idea of fairness. Think about the students who graduated high school together in Colorado—one might get rock-bottom tuition because they came from another country without proper documentation, while their classmate from, say, Texas, faces steep non-resident fees. It’s not that schools can’t enroll them; it’s the extras, the handouts, that Jacobson calls out as discriminatory.
Now, let’s break down what ASSET actually does, because on the surface, it sounds generous—until you see who’s left out. Under this law, if you’re in Colorado without legal immigration status, you can snag in-state tuition and financial aid just by having attended a Colorado high school for one year and living in the state for 12 straight months before college. No citizenship required, no long-term residency proof like in tougher states. To put it in real dollars, an undergrad semester at Colorado State University with 18 credits costs about $6,762 for residents— a steal. But for someone from out of state, even if they’re an American citizen? Over $18,000 for the same classes. That’s not pocket change; it’s a lifeline many families can’t afford. Jacobson and his team argue this discriminates against American-born students who didn’t grow up in Colorado, forcing them to either relocate or pay exorbitant sums. It’s like the system is saying, “If you’re undocumented, we’ll make college affordable—before citizens, that is.” This disparity hits home for so many, especially in a country where education is seen as the great equalizer. Families talk about it over dinner: “Why work hard to come here legally if shortcuts get you ahead?” It fuels debates on immigration, fairness, and the American Dream, making abstract laws feel like personal betrayals.
The project’s investigation began unexpectedly while chasing what seemed like unfair racial preferences in scholarships. While probing Metropolitan State University’s programs, they uncovered ties to ASSET, which went beyond just money—it offered a full package of taxpayer-supported benefits based on this la substituent residency rule. Out-of-state Americans? They don’t qualify, no matter how similar their situation. Jacobson highlights lawsuits the DOJ has filed against similar setups in California and Virginia, where requirements for in-state perks are stricter—like two or three years of high school attendance and graduation without the same lax residency standards. Colorado’s rules are looser, potentially admitting more undocumented students, making it, in the project’s view, worse than those cases. It’s a story of gradual erosion: what starts as a friendly gesture to help kids integrate ends up as a wedge driving division. People imagine the ripple effects—the dwindling spots for local students, the resentment building among communities feeling squeezed. This isn’t just legal nitpicking; it’s about ensuring that public resources benefit those who follow the rules, creating a sense of justice in a nation grappling with immigration changes.
In their formal complaint, filed just last Friday, the Equal Protection Project lays out how Colorado’s ASSET crosses a line, conferring advantages without equitable checks. Jacobson explains they’re not trying to bar undocumented students from education altogether—he’s fine with them attending and participating like anyone else. The fight is purely about the unequal benefits, the scholarships and tuition breaks that prioritize them over American citizens. He envisions a systematic review: compiling a list of 19 states with similar laws, tackling them one by one. Each might differ—some stricter on requirements, others more permissive—but the core theme remains the same: privileging illegal immigrants. It’s a methodical approach, born from patience and anger. Reflecting on this, one can’t help but feel the human toll—the student denied aid, the parent questioning the system, the immigrant kid caught in the middle. Jacobson hopes the DOJ sees the urgency, reminding us that civil rights aren’t just about equality for one group; they’re about protecting everyone from discrimination. It’s a call to action that resonates, turning policy debates into heartfelt pleas for balance.
Finally, the response from Colorado’s leadership has been notably silent. Reached for comment, Governor Jared Polis’s office hasn’t weighed in yet on the Equal Protection Project’s accusations. This silence speaks volumes in a politically charged climate where such programs are praised as progressive yet criticized as divisive. Jacobson remains optimistic that their direct request for an investigation will prompt federal scrutiny, potentially leading to changes or lawsuits that restore fairness. At its heart, this isn’t about vilifying immigrant students; it’s about defending the principle that American citizens shouldn’t be second-class in their own country. Stories of students weathering the high costs of out-of-state tuition circulate—kids working multiple jobs, taking on debt, all while wondering why borders weren’t crossed illegally for that edge. It’s a human drama unfolding in boardrooms and classrooms alike, urging us to ponder: what does equality really mean in an education system funded by all? As this saga unfolds, it might reshape how states balance compassion with the equal protection of the law.
