logo
‘What if I can't go?': Florida repeals in-state tuition for undocumented students

‘What if I can't go?': Florida repeals in-state tuition for undocumented students

Miami Herald13-02-2025

Maria has always been the type of person to plan ahead.
At only 18, she's plotted a careful plan to become a mental health professional. The high school senior from South Florida has already racked up credits in community college that she can apply to her bachelor's degree. She dreams of becoming a forensic psychologist so she can support crime victims and put criminals behind bars. She was recently accepted to Florida International University, her top choice.
Her plans could soon have to change.
That's because Florida lawmakers on Thursday voted to no longer offer undocumented students — like Maria — the opportunity to pay Florida-resident tuition fees at public universities or colleges. The benefit — created by a 2014 law that lawmakers have now repealed — has given thousands of undocumented students the opportunity to more affordably pursue a college education.
Without the ability to pay in-state tuition fees, Maria now wonders if that will impact her ability to pursue her degree.
'Getting into FIU was a moment of 'Oh my God, I'm so excited!' But it was also a moment of, 'What if I can't go?' I'm really uncertain and worried,' said Maria, who came to the U.S. from Honduras as a child and declined using her name fearing repercussions on her college admissions.
Like other undocumented students, Maria doesn't qualify for federal loans, aid, or many scholarships. She also got accepted to the University of Miami, which is private. She doesn't know what sort of aid the school will offer. She could consider a private loan, but that would saddle her with significant debt at a young age. She's hoping she'll be able to cobble her tuition payments together with scholarships.
'This doesn't leave me with many options. Where would I get the money?' she said.
The bill will require state universities and colleges to reevaluate the eligibility of undocumented students who currently receive in-state tuition starting on July 1.
'We wanted to repeal in state tuition and focus on Floridians,' said Gov. Ron DeSantis at a news conference on Thursday as he prepared to sign a bill repealing the benefit.
Up until Thursday, state law allowed undocumented students to seek a waiver and pay in-state tuition rates if they've gone to high school in the state for at least three consecutive years and enrolled in college within two years of graduating from high school.
But Republican lawmakers said it was time to repeal those benefits because Florida is trying to crack down on illegal immigration and does not want to offer financial incentives to people who are in the country illegally.
Democrats tried to amend the bill by allowing undocumented students who are currently enrolled at a public university or college to continue paying the reduced tuition for the next four years, arguing that it will allow them to finish their education without being priced out.
'We made a promise to these students,' Sen. Carlos Guillermo Smith, D-Orlando said. 'I ask you to search your hearts, this is literally the least we can do for these Dreamers who have worked so hard to get here.'
Senate Minority Leader Jason Pizzo, D-Miami, argued 'families would have planned differently if they knew' the Legislature was planning to repeal the decade-old law.
The amendment failed in the Senate, but three Miami Republicans — Sens. Ileana Garcia, Ana Maria Rodriguez and Alexis Calatayud — voted with Democrats in support of it.
Hernan Moreno is a student at Seminole State College studying construction management who has benefited from the tuition waiver. When he was 4 years old, he came to the United States from Chiapas, Mexico, and eventually applied for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. He went through the K-12 system in Florida, and is now pursuing his bachelor's.
He says that without the waiver, he would have to pay three times the rate for classes, and that it would significantly slow down his studies.
'I will have to stop school and save for funds for classes down the line,' he said over text message.
'Those who have the desire for education should be given the same opportunities as everyone else regardless of their immigration status if done the right way!'
It is unclear exactly how many undocumented students will be impacted by the upcoming changes. But data collected from state universities, colleges and technical colleges shows that 6,581 students currently receive the out-of-state tuition waiver.
The waiver is not only for undocumented students. It is also given in other scenarios, such as students who attended public schools in Florida and left to live with a parent after they graduated. But Republican Sen. Randy Fine, R-Palm Bay, said the 'vast majority' of the students that receive the waiver are undocumented.
'There are people who come to the U.S. and other countries to have a better life. There are people who come here because they have no choice and they are looking to have a brighter future than what they could in their own countries,' Maria told the Miami Herald.
FIU hit hard
State data shows that Florida International University had the most students with in-state tuition waivers of any Florida university in the last academic year — 535 in total. Thursday's decision to repeal the in state waivers comes as Jeanette Nuñez, the current lieutenant governor of Florida, gears up to become FIU's interim president, with the school's leadership signaling that they will confirm her to the position permanently.
As a congresswoman in Tallahassee ten years ago, Nuñez sponsored and championed the in-state tuition waivers that gave undocumented students the ability to afford Florida's colleges and universities. As lieutenant governor, she has said the law had run its course and should be eliminated. Democrats and immigration advocates have criticized her reversal as a political move.
Now, if she becomes FIU's next president, she will have to deal with the aftermath of undocumented students on her campus struggling to afford their education without the waivers. On Thursday, about 150 students and faculty members staged a walkout at FIU to oppose her impending appointment.
Read more: FIU students and faculty stage walkout in protest of new interim president Jeanette Nuñez
'To them it's just policies. To us, it's our lives,' said Katherine Retamal, an admissions counselor at FIU.
Dean C. Colson, who is on the board of trustees at Florida International University, was on the Board of Governors when they approved the in-state tuition waiver for undocumented students. He said he is disappointed to see these waivers go away, as he understands that students who come to this country illegally at a young age do without a choice.
'I thought it was good policy then, I think it's good policy now,' said Colson.
Rogelio Tovar, chair of the FIU Board of Trustees, said that he is 'a big supporter that everyone who comes into the country, comes in legally,' but understood that many students who benefit from the in-state tuition waiver came at a young age.
'My heart goes out to those students, there is nothing I want more than anyone that is trying to improve where they are in life, building for their future,' said Tovar. But he added that FIU will have to comply with the law.
'I don't think it's our position to take positions against laws,' he said.
Diego Dulante, 26, is on the verge of completing his master's in public health at the University of South Florida. Dulante came to the United States when he was just 4 years old. He told the Herald he would have never been able to get his bachelor's degree if it were not for the in-state tuition waiver.
'I didn't have a lot of options,' he said, 'I wouldn't have been able to continue my education.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott orders National Guard to immigration protests
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott orders National Guard to immigration protests

Yahoo

time25 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott orders National Guard to immigration protests

Texas is following President Donald Trump's lead, and will deploy the National Guard in preparation for planned protests in the state as demonstrations against immigration raids spread throughout the country in solidarity with Los Angeles. Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican and ally of Trump, said the evening of June 10 he would send the Guard members to locations across the state to "ensure peace & order." "Peaceful protest is legal. Harming a person or property is illegal & will lead to arrest," he said in a post to X. "@TexasGuard will use every tool & strategy to help law enforcement maintain order." Immigration and Customs Enforcement is carrying out a directive from Trump to find immigrants living in the United States without legal status. Protests have sprung up against the sweeps the agency is carrying out in various neighborhoods. In Los Angeles, where protests continued for the last five days, Trump sent National Guard members and U.S. Marines despite the objections of Gov. Gavin Newsom, sparking a showdown between the federal government and state authorities. Abbott's decision comes after protesters in Austin clashed with police on June 9. Police fired less-lethal munitions and detained several people accused of throwing rocks at officers and graffitiing a federal building, Austin Police Chief Lisa Davis said at a news conference. One person was arrested in Dallas after police declared a demonstration unlawful and a firework exploded near police, according to CBS News Texas. Demonstrators in Austin earlier this week began marching peacefully, but police intervened and made eight arrests after some of the protesters graffitied state and federal buildings and others threw "very large rocks" at officers, Davis said. Officers used pepper balls – projectiles that contain a chemical akin to pepper spray – and tear gas to quell the crowd, she said. Two of the people arrested face criminal mischief charges for spray painting the buildings, she said. Other charges include harassment of a public servant and failure to obey a lawful order to disperse. Those arrested ranged in age from 21 to 37. "Don't mess with Texas law enforcement," Abbott said on social media in response to the arrests. Davis said four officers were injured in the scuffle and were treated and released from hospitals. Three were injured by rocks thrown by protesters and one sustained a shoulder injury during an arrest, during which a protester also spit in his eye, Davis said. "These were very large rocks, these were no small pebbles," she said. Davis said officers are preparing for additional demonstrations in Austin, including on June 14. Demonstrations against ICE raids and in solidarity with Los Angeles protesters have sprung up in major cities all around the United States in recent days. Local news outlets and police have reported protests in San Francisco, New York, Washington, Boston, Dallas, Chicago, Atlanta and more. The protests have remained largely peaceful but in some cases turned into clashes with police and led to arrests. In New York City, 86 people were taken into custody on June 10 as hundreds rallied near the city's main immigration court, the New York Police Department said. The day before, more than 30 were arrested ABC 7 reported. Among those were about two dozen arrested from the lobby of Trump Tower, the outlet reported. Some of the nationwide protests were launched by union members in response to the arrest of David Huerta, president of the Service Employees International Union California (SEIU), in Los Angeles on June 6. More than 200 union members and supporters in Boston gathered outside City Hall on June 9, NPR affiliate WBUR reported. In Washington, D.C., hundreds gathered outside the Department of Justice and FBI buildings and marched through the city protesting both ICE raids and Huerta's arrest, according to WUSA9. While the anti-ICE protests continue, "No Kings Day" protests are planned nationwide on June 14, the day Trump will hold a military parade in Washington, D.C., and also celebrate his 79th birthday. Contributing: Christopher Cann, USA TODAY This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Greg Abbott orders National Guard to Texas immigration protests

Opinion - Thomas Massie and Warren Davidson: Two Republican profiles in courage
Opinion - Thomas Massie and Warren Davidson: Two Republican profiles in courage

Yahoo

time28 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Opinion - Thomas Massie and Warren Davidson: Two Republican profiles in courage

The passage of the budget reconciliation bill by the House of Representatives in the early hours of May 22 demonstrated once again President Trump's ability to win the votes of Republican members of Congress. But there were two noteworthy exceptions. Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) were the only Republicans to resist Trump's pressure and vote against his so-called 'big, beautiful bill.' Both men deserve the country's gratitude, even from those on the political left who would struggle to find much in common with these far-right conservatives. Both men are comfortable with Trump's MAGA-world and both have voting records that put them at odds with Democrats. But in voting to oppose the tax bill, they demonstrated that their convictions are real and lived up to the ideal of an independent legislative branch capable of acting without a president's direction. Alongside a Republican party unwilling to balance the power of the presidency, Democrats have demonstrated an equally unproductive tendency to place loyalty to a party leader above their constituents and the country. The aggressive efforts to downplay, dismiss and cover up former President Joe Biden's declining faculties in 2024 offers a prime example of this type of misplaced loyalty. Maryland Gov. Wes Moore (D) went so far as to explain his support for Biden after the June 2024 presidential debate by saying simply, 'I don't do disloyalty.' This sentiment was indicative of a Democratic Party wholly unwilling to call out the obvious — whose leaders and members chose instead to misinform the American people. With their votes in favor of Trump's tax bill, too many Republican members of Congress have done something similar. Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) took a middle path, voting 'present' rather than for or against the bill. But the effect of that meek decision pales in comparison to the clarity offered by Massie and Davidson. Both opposed the bill because they know it massively increases the size of the federal government's annual deficit and relies on future members of Congress to address a problem that needs to be resolved now. Their unwillingness to kick the can further down the road is in keeping with the character it takes to stand up to a president who is willing to threaten the political future of Republicans who oppose his will. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) was courageous enough to admit publicly what most Republicans understand in private: 'We are all afraid.' Republican politicians are intimidated by Trump and his allies. Murkowski has consistently demonstrated uncommon fortitude by her principled opposition to Trump when she disagrees with him or believes his policies will harm her constituents. Massie and Davidson have earned their place as the most principled Republicans in the House by sticking with their beliefs when faced with political consequences. They exemplify the idea that it is better to lose with your principles intact than to win after sacrificing them to political pressure and conformity. In recent decades, both Democrats and Republicans in Congress have abdicated their proper constitutional role in favor of powerful chief executives from their respective parties. At the same time, the judiciary has replaced Congress as the primary check on presidential power — a development that perhaps encourages courts to overstep their intended role. The rebalancing of power in the federal government will start only when members of Congress are willing to assert their independence. A more confident legislative branch would take pressure off the courts and allow them to return to a less activist role. Neither Massie nor Davidson is likely to earn plaudits from Democrats, who have demonstrated their own willingness to put party loyalty over country and are quick to dismiss the value of political independence. They showed this by their shoddy treatment of Rep. Dean Phillips (D-Minn.) after he challenged Biden for the nomination in 2024, and by their growing criticism of Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) for deviating slightly from the ideology of the far left. Democrats have done and are doing exactly what they now accuse Republicans of doing by mindlessly supporting the president's tax bill. Massie and Davidson showed us something better. We might make real progress if more of their colleagues were willing to follow. Colin Pascal is a retired Army lieutenant colonel, a registered Democrat and a graduate student in the School of Public Affairs at American University in Washington, D.C. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Republicans struggle to defend Trump's military parade as tanks prepare to roll in D.C.
Republicans struggle to defend Trump's military parade as tanks prepare to roll in D.C.

Yahoo

time28 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Republicans struggle to defend Trump's military parade as tanks prepare to roll in D.C.

Around this time eight years ago, Donald Trump attended Bastille Day celebrations in France in 2017, which the president apparently loved — in part because it included a military parade along the Champs-Élysées. 'It was one of the greatest parades I've ever seen,' the Republican said after the event, adding, 'It was military might.' Soon after, Trump began pushing for a related display in Washington, D.C., which was not an especially popular idea, even among many of his allies. According to multiple reports, Gen. Paul J. Selva, the then-vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the president during a Pentagon meeting that military parades were 'what dictators do.' There were similar reactions on Capitol Hill, including among Republicans. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said ostentatious American military parades would likely be 'a sign of weakness,' adding that he wasn't interested in a 'Russian-style hardware display.' Around the same time, GOP Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana explained, 'Confidence is silent. Insecurities are loud. When you're the most powerful nation in all of human history, you don't have to show it off, like Russia does, and North Korea, and China. And we are the most powerful nation in all of human history. Everyone knows that, and there's no need to broadcast it. I think we would show our confidence by remaining silent, and not doing something like that.' The White House's plan ultimately unraveled in 2018 — though in politics, it's often tough to keep bad ideas down. On Saturday, June 14, the president will finally get the military parade he's long sought, ostensibly celebrating the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary. The event will also fall on Flag Day, as well as Trump's 79th birthday. Seven years after Graham said such displays would likely be 'a sign of weakness,' the South Carolinian told NBC News this week that he's now 'okay' with the parade. And while that trajectory was probably predictable given Graham's broader political evolution, as HuffPost noted, many of his colleagues were more reluctant to talk about the event. They snapped. They stared off into space. They zipped into Senate elevators and smiled as the doors closed with them safely inside. This is how nearly a dozen Senate Republicans reacted Wednesday when asked the simplest question: Do you plan to attend President Donald Trump's military parade in D.C. on Saturday, and are you comfortable with its estimated $45 million price tag? What's more, GOP senators aren't just loath to answer questions about the military parade, they're also disinclined to show up for the festivities: Politico reported that most congressional Republicans won't be in attendance when tanks start rolling down Constitution Avenue, and 'those begging off include members of the Republican leadership in both chambers.' As for intraparty criticism, Graham has apparently changed his mind, but other Senate Republicans have subtly made clear that they're not fully on board with Trump's vision. 'I wouldn't have done it,' Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky told NBC News this week. 'I'm not sure what the actual expense of it is, but I'm not really, you know, we were always different than, you know, the images you saw in the Soviet Union and North Korea. We were proud not to be that,' Paul said. (He clarified that he was 'not proposing' that that's the image Trump intends to project, but he's worried what message the parade will send.) As for Louisiana's Kennedy, the senator echoed the point he raised during the president's first term. 'The United States of America is the most powerful country in all of human history. We're a lion, and a lion doesn't have to tell you it's a lion. Everybody else in the jungle knows and we're a lion,' the senator said. It's a point Trump will probably never fully understand. This article was originally published on

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store