Federal Judge Strikes Down Illinois In-State Tuition Law

A federal judge has ruled that Illinois’ policies providing in-state tuition, state financial aid, and scholarships to undocumented immigrants are unconstitutional, delivering a significant legal victory for the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement agenda. The decision strikes down three longstanding Illinois programs and has thrown the educational future of more than 27,000 undocumented students into uncertainty.

Context and Background

U.S. District Judge Stephen P. McGlynn, a Trump appointee serving in the Southern District of Illinois, ruled on July 24 that the state’s in-state tuition rules for public universities, the Retention of Illinois Students & Equity (RISE) Act, and the Illinois DREAM Act are “unconstitutional and invalid” under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. According to Fox News, the ruling permanently prevents Illinois from enforcing these laws, though McGlynn issued a 14-day stay to allow the state to seek an appeal.

Illinois had offered in-state tuition to eligible undocumented students since 2003, requiring that students attend an Illinois high school for at least three years, graduate or earn a GED in the state, and sign an affidavit pledging to pursue permanent residency. The RISE Act, enacted later, provided access to state financial aid for students ineligible for federal assistance, while the Illinois DREAM Act established a commission and scholarship fund.

The Legal Challenge

The U.S. Department of Justice filed the original lawsuit against Illinois in September 2025, naming Gov. JB Pritzker, Attorney General Kwame Raoul, and officials from multiple state universities as defendants. The suit argued that the state’s policies violated 8 U.S.C. § 1623(a), which prohibits states from granting postsecondary education benefits to illegal aliens on the basis of residence unless the same benefit is available to every U.S. citizen regardless of where they live.

Oral arguments were heard on May 5, 2026, and McGlynn ultimately granted the federal government’s motion for summary judgment while denying Illinois’ motion to dismiss.

Key Reactions

U.S. Attorney Steven D. Weinhoeft, the top federal prosecutor for the Southern District of Illinois, celebrated the ruling as a victory for the rule of law. “Illinois sought to incentivize illegal immigration on the taxpayer’s dime by treating illegal aliens better than U.S. citizens living in other states, in clear violation of federal law,” Weinhoeft said in a statement. “This ruling enforces the statute Congress wrote and stops the State from putting illegal aliens ahead of American citizens.”

Rep. Mary Miller (R-Ill.) also praised the decision. “This is a win for Illinois taxpayers and American students who were shut out while Pritzker prioritized foreigners in our country illegally,” Miller wrote on social media.

Gov. Pritzker’s office had previously defended the policies when the lawsuit was filed, arguing that “all Illinoisans deserve a fair shot to obtain an education.” As of Friday, the governor’s office had not yet commented on the ruling.

Broader National Campaign

The Illinois ruling is part of a coordinated Trump administration effort to dismantle state-level benefits for undocumented immigrants across the country. The Justice Department has won or reached settlements in cases involving Texas, Kentucky, Oklahoma, and Nebraska, with Nebraska agreeing to end its in-state tuition benefits as part of a settlement.

Lawsuits remain pending against Minnesota, Virginia, California, New Jersey, Kansas, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maryland, and Colorado — the latter of which the DOJ sued on July 24, the same day as the Illinois ruling. Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward made clear the administration’s resolve: “Our litigation efforts will not cease until we have fulfilled President Trump’s promise that illegal aliens will not obtain preferential treatment over our nation’s own citizens.”

Colorado Gov. Jared Polis’ spokesperson responded to that lawsuit by calling the federal government’s intervention “absurd,” arguing that states should have the authority to determine residency for tuition purposes.

Impact and Implications

The ruling directly affects more than 27,600 undocumented students who were enrolled in Illinois colleges in 2023, according to data from the Higher Ed Immigration Portal. At Illinois State University, in-state tuition for fall 2025 stood at $12,066 annually compared to $24,132 for out-of-state students — a cost difference that could now pose a significant barrier for affected students.

Legal experts note that the decision rests on clear statutory language in federal law, making an appeal by Illinois an uphill battle. The 14-day stay gives the Pritzker administration time to seek intervention from the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, but similar challenges in other states have largely failed.

Looking Ahead

If the ruling stands, Illinois lawmakers would need to either end the programs entirely or restructure them to make benefits equally available to all U.S. citizens regardless of residence — a politically difficult proposition in a deeply divided statehouse. Congress could also amend the underlying federal statute to give states more discretion, though such legislation is considered unlikely in the current political climate.

The case highlights the deepening tension between sanctuary states and the federal government, and with midterm elections approximately 100 days away, the ruling carries significant political implications for both parties. For the Trump administration, it represents another notch in a growing string of legal victories — and a clear signal that its campaign against state-level immigration benefits is far from over.