Several organizations argued before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on June 4, asking for the chance to defend the Texas Dream Act, which allowed students without legal status to pay in-state tuition rates. 

A federal judge struck down the Texas Dream Act in June 2025, shortly after the U.S. Department of Justice filed a complaint arguing the law was unconstitutional. The state of Texas chose not to defend the law in court when initially challenged, agreeing with the DOJ. 

Students for Affordable Tuition, Austin Community College, immigrant advocacy organization La Unión del Pueblo Entero along with Oscar Silva, a University of North Texas student, filed a motion to intervene later that month. They argued the court’s quick decision did not allow for sufficient consideration of opposing perspectives. The judge denied the motion in August 2025, and in September, LUPE, ACC and Silva filed an appeal to the Fifth Circuit for a chance to defend the Texas Dream Act in the district court. 

Austin Community College did not respond to a request for comment. 

According to the National Immigration Law Center, the act provided in-state tuition benefits to an estimated 57,000 students. Students qualified if they had lived in Texas for at least three years when graduating high school and signed an affidavit to seek legal status as soon as possible.

“For over 20 years, the Texas Dream Act enabled thousands of undocumented students who graduated from high school to further their education and careers,” Luis Castillo Vela, director of communications for LUPE, wrote in a press release statement. “The unilateral, speedy decision to repeal this law sets back years of progress for immigrant rights and places the state behind in access to higher education.”

Denise Gilman, the co-director of the Immigration Clinic at UT Law School, said the Fifth Circuit is more “conservative” on immigration matters. 

“On the other hand, the Fifth Circuit has also been relatively interested in hearing from all parties in litigation matters,” Gilman said. 

If the Fifth Circuit rules in favor of the organizations, and the case is sent back to district court, the lower court must hear arguments in favor of the Dream Act. If the appeal is denied, the organizations must appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to continue their case, Gilman said. 

“The Supreme Court usually takes up cases where there’s a question of law that really needs to be clarified (and) that is being handled differently in different circuit courts across the United States, and the like,” Gilman said. “It’s unlikely that the Supreme Court would take up the case.”

Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund is the legal organization representing Students for Affordable Tuition. Thomas A. Saenz, MALDEF president and general counsel, said that they are appealing to the circuit court because no opposing arguments were heard in the “inappropriate and illegal” consent decree that blocked the Texas Dream Act. 

Saenz said a large group of “well-qualified, Texas-raised residents” are stripped of a higher education. This opportunity allows them to contribute more to the country’s economy, he said.

“We’ve appealed it because of its massive impact on the state of Texas, including its very large Latino population, particularly large and younger cohorts,” Saenz said. “It harms the whole state of Texas.”