“Texas Republicans pioneered in-state tuition for undocumented students. Now they’re celebrating its end.” was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Twenty-four years ago, Texas became the first state to grant in-state tuition to certain undocumented students.

It was an uncontroversial law, passed by the Legislature in 2001 without much debate and just a handful of nay votes from lawmakers. Democrats, who at the time held a narrow House majority, wanted to boost the number of students in Texas accessing college and Republicans, looking for ways to attract Hispanic voters, reasoned that a more educated workforce would strengthen the state’s economy.

Back then, some prominent Republicans who are still in office voted for the proposal, including now-Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller, state Sens. Lois Kolkhorst of Brenham and Phil King of Weatherford, and Midland Rep. Tom Craddick. Then-Gov. Rick Perry quickly signed the bill into law. Since then, more than 20 states have passed similar measures.

But on Wednesday, Texas abruptly ended the longstanding policy after the federal government filed a lawsuit arguing the state law was unconstitutional. The Department of Justice argued that undocumented students shouldn’t enjoy in-state tuition rates, if U.S. citizens that reside out-of-state must pay higher amounts.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton quickly urged a federal judge to side with the Trump administration, eliminating Texas’ legacy immigration policy without a smidge of a fight.

“Ending this un-American provision is a major victory for Texas,” Paxton posted on social media, taking credit for striking down the law. Paxton has long been against the practice, arguing since he was a state representative more than a decade ago that Texas should focus its resources on residents who are here legally.

Democrats blasted Texas’ quick concession as a “choreographed surrender,” while Texas Republican leaders widely celebrated the decision.

“It was never a good idea, nor is it fair to American citizens on many levels,” Lt. Gov Dan Patrick posted on social media Thursday.

Bill Hammond, a longtime supporter of the policy who was CEO of the Texas Association of Business at the time it initially passed, said the legislatures of the past have supported the measure because there is “a tremendous advantage to a better educated workforce.“

He added that it was frustrating that GOP leaders, who have long clamored in support of state’s rights, didn’t even try to defend their own state’s law.

“It’s extremely disappointing the state laid down on this and accepted an edict from on high when our history has been fighting for local control over these many years,” said Hammond, who served in the state House from 1983 to 1991.

The celebratory response from Texas Republicans about ending the benefits for undocumented students is a reflection of the party’s changing attitudes about immigration policy in the state and nationally. The rise of the Tea Party movement 15 years ago, which paved the way for the more populist and nationalist party of President Donald Trump, ushered in a new era of conservatives who have pushed hardline immigration policies, demanding more border security, fewer pathways to citizenship and stricter penalties for illegal immigration.

In an interview with The Texas Tribune, King said when the bill came up for a vote on the House floor in 2001 it was not explained clearly and he did not realize what he was voting for.

King said he has empathy for people who were brought to the United States as children, but he believes certain benefits should be reserved for citizens only.

“In-state tuition is one of those,” he said.

King said he thinks the increased numbers of migrants coming over the border to Texas over the past two decades and the rising costs to operate the state’s public higher education system contributed to the party’s shifting perspective.

Kolkhorst and Craddick did not respond to requests for comment. In an interview, Miller adamantly denied the bill did what it says it did.

Perry’s defense

The first time he ran for the White House, Perry found himself on the defense for signing the Texas law a decade prior.

At a Republican presidential primary debate in 2011, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum was asked how the GOP could attract Latino voters. He turned the question around on Perry, accusing him of signing the law granting in-state tuition to certain undocumented students “to attract the illegal vote, I mean, the Latino voters.”

Through the primary, Perry continued to take heat, but he defended the law passionately.

“If you say that we should not educate children who have come into our state for no other reason than they’ve been brought there by no fault of their own, I don’t think you have a heart,” Perry said during another debate. “We need to be educating these children because they will become a drag on our society.”

His critics were capitalizing on a growing sentiment among members of the Republican base who felt immigration was negatively changing American culture. Perry’s support of in-state tuition for undocumented students became a weakness to pounce on.

“The Tea Party was looking for cracks in the old guard Republican movement they could exploit politically and this was one of them,” said Brandon Rottinghaus, a political scientist at the University of Houston who wrote Perry’s biography.

Perry declined to be interviewed for this story. He ultimately apologized in a news interview for calling people heartless.

Back in Texas, Patrick, then a state senator, used the issue during his campaign for lieutenant governor in 2013 to highlight his opposition for in-state tuition for undocumented students, pointing to a floor amendment he filed in 2011 that would have ended the policy if it had passed.

But while Patrick and others called for a repeal of the provision, then-Attorney General Greg Abbott was more muted on the issue as he campaigned for governor in a state where Tea Party sentiment was growing alongside the Hispanic population. On the campaign trail, he avoided questions from reporters until he clarified that the state should “reform,” the law but stopped short of calling for its repeal.

“Greg Abbott believes that the objective of the program is noble,” a spokesman said in 2013 to the Tribune. “But, he believes the law as structured is flawed and it must be reformed.”

Bills filed this session

Rottinghaus says the reasons that Republicans embraced this policy at the start don’t appear to be top-of-mind for today’s GOP leaders. State Republicans feel they’ve found other ways to keep the economy stable and they’ve shown success winning over Hispanic voters, which was made especially apparent after Trump in 2024 captured 55% of those voters in Texas.

As the Republican Party base shifted further to the right, lawmakers continued to file bills to repeal the policy every session, but they rarely gained any serious traction.

To Republicans supporters like Hammond, that was evidence that the Legislature still felt it was good policy.

“For the last 20 years the Legislature made a decision and that decision was to maintain this program,” Hammond said. “A bill not passing is a validation of the status quo. That’s a decision.”

This year, for the first time in more than a decade, a bill to end the policy made it out of a legislative committee. The Senate K-16 education committee voted 9-2 to send the bill to the Senate floor, but it never came up for a vote by the full chamber.

In a statement Friday, Patrick confirmed the legislation wasn’t going to pass. He said the bill author, Sen. Mayes Middleton, R-Galveston, “tried his best, but didn’t have support to bring it to the Senate floor.”

Ultimately, it didn’t matter. Two days after the Legislature adjourned, the Trump administration delivered.

“I’m glad AG Paxton settled this lawsuit after session because it immediately bans in-state tuition for illegal immigrants, rather than having to wait for legislation to go into effect,” he added.

Disclosure: Texas Association of Business and University of Houston have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

Big news: 20 more speakers join the TribFest lineup! New additions include Margaret Spellings, former U.S. secretary of education and CEO of the Bipartisan Policy Center; Michael Curry, former presiding bishop and primate of The Episcopal Church; Beto O’Rourke, former U.S. Representative, D-El Paso; Joe Lonsdale, entrepreneur, founder and managing partner at 8VC; and Katie Phang, journalist and trial lawyer.

Get tickets.

TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2025/06/06/texas-gop-in-state-tuition-undocumented-students/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

The post How the Texas GOP moved on tuition for undocumented students appeared first on feeds.texastribune.org

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

The article presents a largely factual and historical overview of Texas’s in-state tuition policy for undocumented students, emphasizing the bipartisan origins and the recent political shift. It reports on Republican opposition and legal challenges in a critical tone, highlighting phrases like “choreographed surrender” and “laid down on this,” which convey subtle criticism of the GOP’s handling of the issue. The framing and language suggest sympathy toward maintaining access to education for undocumented students and skepticism of conservative moves to end the policy. Overall, it leans center-left by favoring educational access and portraying Republican actions as a political retreat rather than principled defense.