DOJ Sues Minnesota Over College Aid Program for Undocumented Immigrants
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched a legal challenge against Minnesota and Governor Tim Walz, targeting a state program that provides financial aid and in-state tuition benefits to undocumented immigrants.
Known as the Minnesota Dream Act, the program—enacted in 2013—allows students without legal immigration status to qualify for reduced tuition rates and state-funded financial assistance, provided they meet certain residency and school attendance criteria.
In its lawsuit, the DOJ contends that the program discriminates against U.S. citizens who reside outside Minnesota. “Tuition costs for resident students are significantly lower than for out-of-state U.S. citizens,” the DOJ stated. “This discrepancy constitutes substantial and unconstitutional discrimination.”
Attorney General Pam Bondi, heading the DOJ under the Trump administration, condemned the program. “No state should treat Americans like second-class citizens by extending financial benefits to undocumented immigrants,” Bondi said. She also referenced a recent victory in a similar Texas case, promising that the DOJ will vigorously pursue the Minnesota lawsuit.
The legal action also names Minnesota’s Office of Higher Education and State Attorney General Keith Ellison as defendants. This lawsuit follows President Donald Trump’s April directive for federal agencies to review and dismantle policies that favor undocumented immigrants over American citizens.
Governor Walz, who was the Democratic vice-presidential nominee in 2024, has yet to issue a detailed response. He previously remarked that the nation “was not ready” for the progressive platform promoted during his campaign.
In a related development, the U.S. Supreme Court recently limited federal judges’ authority to issue nationwide injunctions blocking presidential actions. The 6-3 ruling came after a surge of lower court orders halted several of Trump’s executive policies.
Attorney General Bondi hailed the Supreme Court decision as a win for executive power. “This success was made possible by the tireless efforts of our legal team,” she declared on X (formerly Twitter).
The ruling stemmed from a case involving Trump’s contentious executive order on birthright citizenship. The order stipulates that children born in the U.S. are granted automatic citizenship only if at least one parent is a citizen or legal permanent resident. While the Court permitted the policy’s limited implementation, it delayed a final verdict until its next session starting in October.
Experts at the Migration Policy Institute estimate that if fully enforced, the order could affect more than 250,000 births annually.
As these high-stakes legal battles unfold, their outcomes could reshape immigration and education policies and redefine the balance of power between state governments, federal courts, and the executive branch.