Arizona AG Mayes Defends Prop 308 In-State Tuition Against Federal Lawsuit

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes vowed to defend Proposition 308 against a federal lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice. Approved by voters in 2022, the law grants in-state tuition eligibility at public universities and community colleges to students regardless of immigration status, provided they graduate from an Arizona high school.

The Legal Fault Line Over Tuition and Residency

When Arizona voters approved Proposition 308, they overturned a law voters had enshrined 16 years earlier that explicitly banned non-citizens from receiving state-subsidized higher education benefits. The current framework allows any student who completed at least two years at an Arizona high school and earned a high school diploma or GED to pay standard in-state rates. Previously, undocumented students faced out-of-state tuition rates that were nearly double.

The U.S. Department of Justice argues that the state law circumvents federal statutes restricting postsecondary benefits based on length of residency.

According to DOJ attorney Garrett Greene, the two-year high school attendance requirement functions as a near-perfect proxy for residency. In court filings, Greene pointed out that Arizona school districts are legally mandated to verify local residency upon enrollment. Therefore, federal attorneys assert, the state is effectively granting residency-based benefits through an educational loophole.

The Bottom Line

• Legal Defense: Attorney General Kris Mayes maintains that Proposition 308 complies fully with federal law because eligibility hinges on educational attainment rather than state residency duration.
• Statutory Precedent: The federal challenge centers on whether high school attendance records violate restrictions against granting postsecondary benefits based on length of residency.

Navigating Statutory Boundaries and Tuition Economics

In a 2025 legal opinion, Attorney General Mayes argued that the measure’s broad language covers students who might graduate from an Arizona school, move out of state temporarily, and return, alongside students commuting from tribal lands that span multiple state lines.

“Residence is not what triggers eligibility under (Prop. 308),” Mayes wrote in her legal opinion. “Although many people who meet the eligibility requirements will also be residents, not all will be. And whether someone is or is not a resident is simply not relevant to the eligibility inquiry under (Prop. 308).”

Metric	Prior Law (Pre-2022)	Current Law (Proposition 308)
Tuition Rate	Out-of-state rate (nearly double)	Standard in-state tuition rate
Eligibility Basis	Strict federal/state residency verification	2+ years Arizona high school attendance & graduation
State Financial Aid	Prohibited for non-citizens	Eligible based on educational milestone

Richie Taylor, a spokesman for the Attorney General’s office, reiterated via an emailed statement that the DOJ’s lawsuit lacks legal backing. Taylor emphasized that the standard written into law by voters relies strictly on school attendance rather than residency status.

Economic Rationales From Campaign Architects

Tyler Montague, who led the Yes on 308 campaign, argued that the policy was intentionally crafted to comply with federal requirements while integrating long-term state residents into the skilled labor pool.

Photo: yahoo.com

“It’s not tied to DACA, it’s not a special treatment for undocumented people,” Montague stated. “It simply does not exclude undocumented people.” Montague added that students pursuing degrees under this framework represent a vital growth engine for the local economy rather than a drain on public resources.

Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice.