By JIM VERTUNO AND NADIA LATHAN, Associated Press

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — The Justice Department on Wednesday sought to block a Texas law that for decades has given college students without legal residency in the U.S. access to reduced in-state tuition rates, the latest effort by the Trump administration to crack down on immigration into the country.

Texas was the first state in the nation in 2001 to pass a law allowing “Dreamers,” or young adults without legal status, to be eligible for in-state tuition if they meet certain residency criteria. And while two dozen states now have similar laws, the Trump administration filed the lawsuit in conservative Texas, where Republican Gov. Greg Abbott and state lawmakers have long sought to support his hardline goals on the border.

The lawsuit also comes just a few days after the end of the state legislative session, where a repeal bill pushed by group of Republicans was considered but ultimately did not come up for a vote.

The lawsuit now asks a federal judge to block the Texas law. It leans into recent executive orders signed by Trump designed to stop any state or local laws or regulations the administration feels discriminate against legal residents.

“Under federal law, schools cannot provide benefits to illegal aliens that they do not provide to U.S. citizens,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said. “The Justice Department will relentlessly fight to vindicate federal law and ensure that U.S. citizens are not treated like second-class citizens anywhere in the country.”

Texas has about 57,000 undocumented students enrolled in its public universities and colleges, according to the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, a nonpartisan nonprofit group of university leaders focused on immigration policy. The state has about 690,000 students overall at its public universities.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and state Attorney General Ken Paxton, did not immediately comment on the lawsuit, and staff did not immediately respond to email messages seeking comment.

The lawsuit was filed in the Wichita Falls division of the Northern District of Texas, which the state and conservative litigants have often chosen to file lawsuits challenging the federal government and issues such as healthcare and gay and transgender rights.

The Texas law was initially passed by sweeping majorities in the Texas Legislature and signed into law by then-Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, as a way to open access to higher education for students without legal residency already living in the state. Supporters then and now argue it boosts the state’s economy by creating a better educated and better prepared work force.

“Targeted attacks on Texas students who are seeking an affordable college education, led by the Trump administration, won’t help anyone, they only hurt us all,” said Luis Figueroa of Every Texan, a left-leaning public policy group.

The difference in tuition rates is substantial. For example, at the flagship University of Texas at Austin, a state resident paid about $11,000 in tuition for the 2024-2025 academic year compared to about $41,000 for students from outside of Texas. Other expenses for housing, supplies and transportation can add nearly $20,000 more, according to school estimates.

The law allows for students without legal resident status to qualify for in-state tuition if they have lived in the state for three years before graduating from high school, and for a year before enrolling in college. They must also sign an affidavit promising to apply for legal resident status as soon as possible.

But the policy soon came under fire from conservatives and critics who called it unfair to legal residents as debates over illegal immigration intensified. In the 2012 Republican presidential primary, Perry ended up apologizing after saying critics of the law “did not have a heart.”

Legislative efforts to repeal the Texas law have repeatedly failed, but have started to gain traction elsewhere. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, earlier this year signed a bill that will repeal that state’s in-state tuition law in July.

Originally Published: June 4, 2025 at 3:19 PM PDT

GRIMES COUNTY, Texas (KTRK) — The search for an escaped Grimes County inmate came to an end on Tuesday when he was arrested in north Houston.

According to the Grimes County Sheriff’s Office, the U.S. Marshal’s Gulf Coast Violent Offenders Task Force captured McArthur Deashy Mathis at about 1:34 p.m. at a Petco near I-45 and West Road.

According to the US Marshal’s Gulf Coast Violent Offenders & Fugitive Task Force, someone recognized Mathis and called in the tip to Crime Stoppers.

Mathis, according to the marshal’s office, was found with a woman who had also been at the hospital in Austin.
That woman was not criminally charged after being captured.

Mathis escaped last week while he was undergoing treatment at the Cross Creek Psychiatric and Addiction Hospital in Austin.

ORIGINAL REPORT: Grimes County inmate escapes Austin-area hospital, sheriff says; 2nd incident in three months

The sheriff told ABC13 Mathis had been sent to that hospital in Austin because another inmate escaped from a behavioral hospital in north Harris County back in March.

Mathis was transported back to the Grimes County Jail.

“The cooperative and tireless efforts of the law enforcement at the Austin Police Dept. working in unison with the Lone Star Fugitive Task Force in Austin and the investigators of the GCSO helped coordinate this manhunt to a successful arrest,” the sheriff’s office said in a statement.

For more on this story, follow Pooja Lodhia on Facebook,X and Instagram.

Programs where governments give cash to low-income people with no strings attached may be permitted to continue in Texas after lawmakers failed to pass bills barring these programs.

Republican lawmakers filed four bills this legislative session to stop guaranteed income programs, arguing that public money should not be given to private individuals without a clear purpose.

But while at least one bill appeared to have the momentum needed to become law, all eventually failed.

Both state Sen. Paul Bettencourt, a Republican from Houston and state Rep. Ellen Troxclair, a Republican from the Austin area, authored bills prohibiting direct or indirect cash payments from local governments to individuals.

Senate Bill 2010, filed by Bettencourt, showed the most promise of becoming law this session. Lawmakers passed it out of the Senate. It went to the House. But once there it died.

Bettencourt did not respond to a request for comment, while Troxclair’s office declined an interview.

Guaranteed income programs have become increasingly popular in the U.S. New York, Los Angeles and New Orleans all have or had guaranteed income programs. Supporters of guaranteed income programs have painted them as necessary safety nets, especially as the cost of food and housing has risen across the country.

“It is the fine line between living in survival mode, just barely making it, and being able to thrive and take care of yourself,” said Ashleigh Hamilton, who was part of a guaranteed income program in Texas during the pandemic and testified against these bills during the legislative sessions

Austin has had a guaranteed income program since 2022. Last year, the city committed to giving 97 people $1,000 a month for a year. Participants received their last payment in May.

But as much as these programs have been celebrated, they have equally been criticized. GOP-led states, including Iowa, Arkansas and Idaho, have outlawed them.

Even before the legislative session began it was clear guaranteed income would be a target of Texas lawmakers. In Jan. 2024, Bettencourt asked Attorney General Ken Paxton to investigate whether guaranteed income programs violate the state constitution.

Months later, Paxton made his opinion clear: He sued Harris County to halt its guaranteed income program. The Texas Supreme Court issued a ruling freezing the program.

“There is no such thing as free money — especially in Texas,” Paxton wrote in the lawsuit. He pointed to a clause in the state’s constitution prohibiting public funds from being given to private individuals with no clear aim.

Lawmakers made similar arguments this session. They also questioned in hearings whether government cash programs that don’t require participants to work encouraged people to work less.

Research on the impacts of guaranteed income on employment are mixed. One study found that people who got $1,000 a month worked, on average, 1.3 fewer hours a week than people who did not receive this cash. Other researchers have found no impact on work hours.

Lawmakers did not spend much time debating how people who participate in guaranteed income programs spend that money, which has historically been a critique of these programs. In one study of Austin’s guaranteed income program, people who received the money said they spent most of it on housing, either in the form of rent or mortgage payments.

It’s unclear if Austin will continue to fund its guaranteed income program. Mayor Pro Tem Vanessa Fuentes, who represents parts of Southeast Austin and has been an advocate of guaranteed income in the past, said Monday she would push to continue it. The city typically finalizes its budget in August.