Art. IV P & I Clause and Nonresident Tuition

[Allan Ides]

I think the answer to this is no.  A state is not permitted to
establish degrees of citizenship.

Allan Ides
Loyola Law School, Los Angeles

----- Original Message -----
From: Craig Oren <oren at CAMDEN.RUTGERS.EDU>
Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 3:31 pm
Subject: Re: Art. IV P & I Clause and Nonresident Tuition

> but must a state follow a "one-size-fits-all" approach? Could a state
> rationally say, "look, we'll grant you the right to vote immediately,
> because that's so importnat, but we'll take a different approach to
> tuition, because we don't want you coming in and getting a benefit
> thatyou haven't paid for in taxes"? I think that it's important
> here not to
> think that a categorization for one purpose must determine all
> categorizations.
>
>
> On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Bryan Wildenthal wrote:
>
> > Ira's points are certainly sound and point to other angles that
> must be
> > considered, but I wonder whether the undergraduate residency
> rules are an
> > obsolete relic of when the age of majority was 21 and college
> students were
> > under the "in loco parentis" supervision of colleges (as opposed
> to just
> > plain "loco" as they are now).
> >
> > What right does the state have to second-guess the motives of an
> adult who
> > lives in a state for educational purposes?  What about a 50-year-
> old who
> > goes back to get a PhD?  I'm a tenured law prof in California
> and I still go
> > back to visit my Mom in Michigan (which I left when I was 18),
> and she still
> > complains that I have boxes of stuff in her garage (just like
> when I was an
> > undergrad).
> >
> > At any rate, there is something incongruous about a system in
> which an
> > 18-year-old college freshman can participate in electing a
> state's governor
> > barely a month after moving into the dorm (as I did in
> California in 1982 --
> > and it was a close election, my vote for Bradley almost made the
> > difference!), yet is not viewed as a "real" state resident for other
> > purposes.
> >
> > Bryan Wildenthal
> > Thomas Jefferson School of Law
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Lupu, Ira (Chip) [mailto:iclupu at MAIN.NLC.GWU.EDU]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 3:37 PM
> > > To: CONLAWPROF at listserv.ucla.edu
> > > Subject: Re: Art. IV P & I Clause and Nonresident Tuition
> > >
> > >
> > > First, Dan Conkle is right that this is a 14th A problem, not
> an Art.
> > > IV problem; I believe that state-created benefits don't count for
> > > Article IV purposes.  Second, the difference between tuition
> > > benefits and most others perhaps rests on an overbroad but
> > > reasonable intuition that students (especially undergrads)
> have not
> > > really migrated, with an intent to settle and abide, in the
> way that
> > > welfare recipients have.  Most students (wherever they have their
> > > driver's license, or vote) still "go home" when school is not in
> > > session, and "home" is where some or all of the rest of their
> family> > resides.  If this is so, the distinction is a bit unfair
> to those
> > > students who are really making the school state into their home
> > > state, but it doesn't significantly threaten the
> > > constitutional concern
> > > that people be free to change their home state and be treated as
> > > equals in the state of arrival.
> > >
> > >
> > > Ira C. ("Chip") Lupu
> > > The George Washington University School of Law
> > > 2000 H St., NW
> > > Washington D.C 20052
> > >
> > > (202) 994-7053
> > >
> > > ICLUPU at main.nlc.gwu.edu
> > >
> >
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> Professor Craig N. Oren                    telephone 856-225-6365
> Rutgers School of Law-Camden               fax  856-969-7921
> Rutgers-The State University of New Jersey
> 217 N. 5th Street
> Camden, N.J. 08102-1203                    oren at camden.rutgers.edu
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
>