Education Landscape Shifts — Citizens First

Modern school building with large windows and a clear sky

The Trump administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration is exposing how decades of “open border” policies forced American schools to divert billions meant for your kids toward programs benefiting undocumented students, but new federal reforms are finally putting citizens first.

Story Highlights

Trump administration cuts $12.4 billion from education programs that previously subsidized undocumented students while boosting border enforcement funding by $90 billion
Federal lawsuits target 25 states offering in-state tuition to illegal immigrants, claiming discrimination against American students
White House eliminates taxpayer funding for Migrant Education Program, redirecting resources to U.S. citizen children
90,000 undocumented students graduate high school annually, with advocates demanding continued access to benefits despite legal status

Federal Reforms Redirect Billions to American Students

The Trump administration terminated taxpayer subsidies for postsecondary education programs serving illegal immigrants, marking a decisive shift in federal education priorities. The Department of Education ended funding for career and technical education programs that previously allowed undocumented students to access training opportunities alongside American citizens. This policy reversal follows passage of H.R. 1, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, in July 2025, which allocated $90 billion to immigration enforcement while cutting the Department of Education budget by $12.4 billion—a 15 percent reduction aimed at eliminating what officials called preferential treatment for illegal aliens over American families.

In-State Tuition Benefits Face Legal Challenges

Attorney General Pam Bondi filed federal lawsuits challenging in-state tuition policies in 25 states plus the District of Columbia, arguing these programs unlawfully discriminate against U.S. citizens by offering lower tuition rates to illegal immigrants. Before 2024, these states provided undocumented students the same tuition breaks as resident citizens, a practice supported under previous bipartisan immigration frameworks. The legal actions target what the administration characterizes as a two-tiered system that punishes American families with higher costs while rewarding those who violated immigration laws. These lawsuits represent the most aggressive federal challenge to state-level education benefits for undocumented populations since the 1982 Plyler v. Doe Supreme Court decision established K-12 access rights.

Migrant Education Program Eliminated Under Border Security Reforms

The White House defunded the Migrant Education Program, which previously provided supplemental services to children of migrant workers, including those in the country illegally. Administration officials justified the elimination by citing the program’s expansion under the Biden administration to include diversity, equity, and inclusion priorities that allegedly prioritized illegal immigrant children over American students. The FY2026 budget proposal withholds $6.2 billion in federal education funding tied to compliance with new immigration enforcement protocols. This represents a fundamental reorientation of federal education spending toward what officials describe as “defending education” for American citizens rather than subsidizing services for families who entered unlawfully.

Education Advocates Claim Policies Harm Economic Mobility

Immigration advocates argue the policy changes undermine educational opportunity for approximately 90,000 undocumented students who graduate from U.S. high schools each year, many of whom have lived in America since childhood. Researchers from the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration contend that restricting access doesn’t create more opportunities for citizens but rather limits overall educational capacity and economic contributions. The Migration Policy Institute warns these restrictions contrast sharply with proposals to offer affluent foreigners expedited pathways through investment programs. However, this argument ignores the fundamental principle that American citizens should receive priority access to taxpayer-funded educational resources, particularly when border enforcement failures allowed millions to enter illegally and compete for limited school funding and services designed for legal residents.