Some non-citizen students who previously qualified for in-state tuition, state financial aid, or both under the Texas Dream Act say there is little clarification on the new procedure of verifying their immigration papers, despite the fact that the first big payment deadline to confirm autumn attendance was August 14.
Higher education institutions were directed to create their own procedures to identify students who were illegally present and no longer qualified for in-state tuition and/or state financial aid after a federal judge invalidated the Texas Dream Act in June.
According to public records obtained by The Texan, UT issued letters to students asking for proof of lawful presence in two waves: on July 11 to around 950 students and again on July 22 to almost 200 students, only two days before the deadline of July 24. Students were told to use UT Box, a secure file-sharing facility, to submit documentation or to resubmit a Texas residency inquiry.
In addition to mentioning a U.S. passport, permanent residence card, or valid visa as proof of legal status, the university’s message to students also used the phrase “lawful presence.” Edna Yang, co-executive director of American Gateways, a nonprofit that offers low-income immigrants legal services, stated in an email that these are two distinct ideas.
Both phrases are used in the (UT) email, and Yang wrote that it would be possible for someone who is legally present to fill out the required affidavit and get in-state tuition, particularly if they are pursuing legal permanent residency.
The legal right to live in the United States is known as “lawful presence,” according to the Texas Department of Public Safety. According to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, a person’s lawful status is determined by their unique immigration benefit, which is often indicated on an I-94 form. The Texas Immigration Law Council asserts that lawful presence is a more comprehensive term that can refer to a wider range of immigration categories than lawful status.
About 350 documents and 500 residence questionnaires were received by the residency office for assessment as of July 24. Although 192 students had their residency decisions finalized, it is unknown if all affected students had been informed of their status as of this writing.
Nidhi Chanchlani, a senior in psychology, said she came to UT on an H-4 visa, which is intended for dependent children of foreign workers in the US, after graduating from a Texas high school. She applied for an F-1 visa, which is intended for students, in order to make sure she could transition to her new status before the H-4 visa expired in order to meet age restrictions, as she turns 21 around the beginning of the fall semester.
Chanchlani claimed she was labeled a non-resident with little explanation from Texas One Stop after she received the email last month asking for proof of lawful status. Chanchlani stated that even if her residency status was returned to in-state on August 13, she still had to fulfill the deadline of August 14.
Nothing that permits students to attend UT is ever black and white, whether it’s immigration or financial aid, according to Chanchlani. In actuality, UT students are a diaspora in a socioeconomic, immigrant sense rather than a cultural one. The institution of UT continually portrays its student body as though they are a binary, as though they neatly fall into one of two groups.
