From Deseret News archives:

Kansas ruling felt in Utah

Judge upholds in-state tuition for some illegals

Published: Thursday, July 7, 2005 9:15 a.m. MDT
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
Evans has argued that Utah's tuition law complies with federal law because it's equally available to U.S. citizens on the basis of where they went to high school, not their state of residence. He has also said it would be difficult for students paying out-of-state tuition to sue because the law doesn't apply to them.

Rep. David Ure, R-Kamas, sponsored Utah's law, which he said doesn't discuss residence, and is "written more tightly and more precisely than (the Kansas) law was. We're on even better legal grounds than they are.

"I think it's going to knock a lot of air out of their arrogance when they bring it to the floor next year," Ure said.

However, Rep. Glenn Donnelson, R-North Ogden, said the ruling hasn't changed his decision to sponsor the repeal of the tuition law, which he says is "still against the law.

"I'm sure that people will say we don't have a problem here, but we still have a problem here," Donnelson said.

U. of U. sophomore Kelly Wolfe, who is among those considering a suit, says it's a matter of principle.

"We are being affected," Wolfe said. "They should not be allowing illegal aliens to have something the federal government says they can't have unless citizens have it."

Story continues below
Kobach said the plaintiffs' key argument is based on a 1996 federal law that doesn't allow illegal immigrants to be given a tuition benefit unavailable to citizens, regardless of residence. The argument was one of six claims, which also included equal protection.

"We believe the judge has got it wrong to rely on financial damages to bring equal protection challenges," Kobach said. "If the judge's ruling were to stand, it would be very difficult for anyone to bring equal protection challenges in the future."

Utah Latino rights activist Tony Yapias said the Kansas ruling "gives us more fuel to the fire" in efforts to persuade lawmakers to keep the law intact.

"I think the biggest thing right now is that a judge has said there isn't a case," Yapias said. "I'm just concerned our legislators could have waited a little bit longer, rather than take an anti-immigrant group and attorney at face value."


E-mail: dbulkeley@desnews.com

Comments

You can be the first to comment on this story.

previousnext

Latest comments

Editorial: 10 years of TRAX

Sorry earlier I meant to say that tracks seems to travel at 35 miles an hour...

'Peter Frumhoff, the director of science and policy at the Union of...

The Non-BCS crowd ought to create their own title game...their own brand, and...

Letters: Democrats' ethics

That's the whole of your defense of GOP resistance to badly-needed ethics...

Your criticism should hardly be focused on Bennett alone. What about all the...

'Wired's Threat Level blog reported on November 20 that Gavin Schmidt, a...

The reality of climate change is supported by multiple lines of evidence and...

BYU professor remembered

I had the priviledge of staying in the LeBaron home on severl occasions as I...

Letters: Growing jobless rate

So the unemployment rate has dropped to "just" 10%, huh? I wonder what that...

Ahh for the love of money...what money can buy!!!

Advertisements