A high-stakes legal clash has erupted, as the U.S. Department of Justice accuses Minnesota of discriminating against U.S. citizens through a state program that extends in-state tuition and financial aid to undocumented students. At the heart of the case: the state’s longstanding “Minnesota Dream Act” and its recent North Star Promise Scholarship. The lawsuit, one of three similar federal moves this month, places Minnesota at the center of the national debate over state college aid and federal supremacy.
1. Federal Government Takes Legal Action
On June 25, 2025, the DOJ filed suit in federal district court against Minnesota, Gov. Tim Walz, the Office of Higher Education, and Attorney General Keith Ellison. Citing the Supremacy Clause, the complaint asserts that state law conflicts with federal regulations prohibiting benefits for undocumented immigrants not equally extended to citizens campusreform.org+6Politico+6Inside Higher Ed+6Courthouse News+6Department of Justice+6AP News+6.
Attorney General Pam Bondi condemned the policy:
“No state can be allowed to treat Americans like second-class citizens in their own country by offering financial benefits to illegal aliens.” Fox News+9Department of Justice+9Inside Higher Ed+9
She also referenced the DOJ’s recent win in Texas, where a similar program was scrapped after swift legal action Politico.
2. Minnesota’s Programs Under Fire
A. Minnesota Dream Act (2013)
Signed by Gov. Mark Dayton, this law grants undocumented students who attended a Minnesota high school for at least three years and graduated (or obtained a GED) access to in-state tuition. Applicants must also show they’ve applied for lawful immigration status—though that requirement is currently waived due to lack of federal processing pathways KSTP.com 5 Eyewitness News+3highereddive.com+3Courthouse News+3.
B. North Star Promise Scholarship (2024)
As a last-dollar aid program, it covers remaining tuition and fees for qualifying residents earning under $80,000 annually—including eligible undocumented students highereddive.com.
The DOJ argues neither program is available to out‑of‑state U.S. citizens, creating unequal treatment KARE 11+9Politico+9campusreform.org+9.
3. Parallel Federal Actions in Other States
This is the third suit this month targeting state tuition laws:
-
Kentucky: Sued last week over a similar undocumented tuition policy KSTP.com 5 Eyewitness News+10Politico+10Inside Higher Ed+10AP News+4Inside Higher Ed+4Courthouse News+4.
-
Texas: A DOJ suit prompted the state to dismantle its 20-year-old Dream Act within hours .
These cases follow President Trump’s April executive order empowering federal agencies to counter state policies favoring undocumented immigrants AP News+5Politico+5Inside Higher Ed+5.
4. Federal Claims of Citizen Discrimination
The DOJ asserts that:
-
Federal law bans states from offering benefits to undocumented immigrants not equally available to U.S. citizens.
-
Minnesota’s programs violate this standard because they offer below full-cost tuition only to residents. Out‑of‑state citizens must pay more.
-
The tuition gap is significant: e.g., University of Minnesota–Twin Cities charged ~$17,214 in-state vs. ~$38,362 out-of-state in 2024–25 KSTP.com 5 Eyewitness News+4Politico+4Inside Higher Ed+4AP News+7Courthouse News+7AP News+7.
-
Hence, the DOJ seeks a permanent injunction blocking enforcement.
5. Minnesota’s Defense Position
Defenders highlight:
-
Compliance parity: Undocumented and citizen students must meet the same criteria—residency, high-school attendance, GED, and selective registration campusreform.orgCourthouse News.
-
Community integration: Attendees brought as children, educated locally, and active contributors.
-
State autonomy: 21 states (plus D.C.) currently permit in-state tuition for undocumented students, as do 16 states including scholarships AP News+1highereddive.com+1.
-
Policy justification: The North Star program targets low-income students to promote accessibility, regardless of immigration status KARE 11.
Supporters argue that policy nuance matters—is offering benefits to long-term residents a federal crime? They say the DOJ misreads the law.
6. Legal Stakes: Supremacy vs. State Sovereignty
Federal Supremacy
The DOJ hinges on federal statutes limiting educational benefits to undocumented immigrants. Like in past cases, Texas’s rapid compliance signals that federal law may prevail.
State Policy Discretion
Minnesota’s defense invokes state spending authority. With many states embracing similar policies, a legal precedent here could have sweeping impact across the 21 affected states.
7. Political, Social, and Economic Ripples
A. At the Capitol
-
Governor Walz called the lawsuit an “overreach” and plans a vigorous defense.
-
Minnesota Democrats framed it as a protective measure for Dreamers.
B. Across the nation
This federal action casts a shadow over 21 states and D.C., potentially prompting broad reevaluation of higher-ed funding structures AP News+3AP News+3Politico+3Courthouse News+1Politico+1highereddive.com+3AP News+3Fox News+3.
C. For undocumented students
Potential loss of affordability—could price out deserving students with strong academic and economic contributions.
D. To the taxpayer debate
DOJ frames it as fairness for Americans; Minnesotans point to the economic and civic benefits of investing early in residents.
8. How Minnesota Measures Up
Documentation indicates Minnesota doesn’t have a large undocumented student population—their numbers ineligible for counting in 2021 highereddive.com. However, similar to Kentucky, policy stands not on volume but principle.
9. National Implications & Future Litigation
If Minnesota resists:
-
DOJ may pursue 33 more states with similar laws.
-
Courts could define whether “residency + education” trumps citizenship in higher-ed benefits.
-
The Supreme Court may eventually adjudicate, setting a nationwide ruling.
10. What’s Next?
Minnesota’s legal team will file a formal response. Expect expert legal debates on federal statutes, state rights, and constitutional principles.
Meanwhile, the political and economic narratives continue:
-
Supporters mount rallies and campus campaigns.
-
Opponents use this to rally conservative voters against Biden-aligned state policies.
-
National spotlight may force fast action in states fearing federal action.
Final Word
This lawsuit is more than a legal dust-up—it’s a clash between federal authority and state experimentation, fairness vs. sovereignty, and shifting American identity. Whether the courts strike down Minnesota’s programs—or preserve them—will have profound ramifications for state policymaking, immigration advocacy, and the future of higher education in America.
Adrian Hawthorne is a celebrated author and dedicated archivist who finds inspiration in the hidden stories of the past. Educated at Oxford, he now works at the National Archives, where preserving history fuels his evocative writing. Balancing archival precision with creative storytelling, Adrian founded the Hawthorne Institute of Literary Arts to mentor emerging writers and honor the timeless art of narrative.