Maryland is a well-known sanctuary state for illegal immigrants, so the fierce backlash against granting discounted tuition to the children of illegal immigrants has come as something of a surprise. Apparently, enough is enough — even in Maryland.
Judicial Watch, the conservative government watchdog group, now says it will appeal the Montgomery Circuit Court’s Aug. 16 dismissal of its lawsuit against Montgomery College for allowing illegal immigrants who graduate from Montgomery County high schools to attend classes at discounted in-county rates. Montgomery College’s Board of Trustees officially adopted the policy on Nov. 15, 2010.
The government watchdog group estimates that the practice cost the tax-supported community college $5.8 million between 2006 and 2009 in uncollected tuition and fees. The group’s lawsuit argued that since tuition rates are set in accordance with a student’s legal residence, it is unlawful to grant discounted rates to those who are not legal residents of the U.S., and by extension legal residents of Montgomery County.
Circuit Court Judge Marielsa A. Bernard ruled that Judicial Watch’s Montgomery County clients lacked standing to sue, and dismised the case with prejudice.
“This decision seems to ignore nearly 150 years of binding precedent in the State of Maryland allowing citizens to challenge the illegal expenditure of taxpayer funds,” said Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. “Maryland taxpayers should not have to bear the burden of paying for the cost of educating illegal aliens.”
Fitton’s vow to appeal the ruling is just the latest example of increasing public pressure to draw the line at in-state tuition. A controversial referendum to repeal the state DREAM Act, which was passed by the Maryland General Assembly and signed into law by Gov. Martin O’Malley, will appear on the November 2012 statewide ballot. Implementation of the new law, which was estimated to cost state taxpayers $3.5 million annually by 2016, was suspended when petitioners collected the tens of thousands of voter signatures necessary to put the measure on the ballot.
Meanwhile, DREAM Act supports have filed a lawsuit of their own
