Governor blocks plan to end in-state tuition for immigrants who graduate from Kansas high schools

Sen. Mike Thompson, R-Shawnee, presides over a Feb. 2, 2026, legislative hearing. Thompson pushed false claims during a debate on legislation to end in-state college tuition rates for immigrants. (Photo by Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector)

TOPEKA — A pair of Senate Republicans challenged their partisan peers’ bogus claims about immigrants during an end-of-session debate on the state’s longstanding policy of offering in-state college tuition rates to Kansas high school graduates, regardless of their citizenship status.

A slim majority of Senate Republicans still backed Senate Bill 254 to end the policy. On Monday, Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed the bill.

“This bill targets Kansans who were brought to the United States as children,” the Democratic governor said. “To punish these kids for decisions their parents made years ago is not only cruel, but also not in the best interest of the state. Kansas needs these young people to be educated and trained so they can enter our workforce and contribute to our state’s economy.”

Lawmakers are set to return Thursday to Topeka to try to override the governor’s vetoes on various bills. This one cleared the Senate 22-18 and the House 78-46. Both totals were short of the 27 needed in the Senate and 84 in the House to override a veto.

For now, Kelly’s pen stroke settles more than a year of turmoil that began when Sen. Mike Thompson, R-Shawnee, refused to let a large group of opponents testify against the bill. The chief supporter was Republican Attorney General Kris Kobach.

The opponents included Lenexa City Councilwoman Melanie Arroyo, who became a U.S. citizen in 2018. The Kansas Bureau of Investigation initiated a police review of her citizenship status based on a complaint from Lenexa resident Douglas Shipe, who misinterpreted her written testimony.

The bill resurfaced during this year’s legislative session. After it cleared the Senate, the House suspended its rules to bring the bill directly to the floor, a procedural move designed to avoid public hearings or scrutiny. Lawmakers in both chambers worked on revisions to the bill before voting again in the final week of the regular session.

At issue is a state policy in place since 2004 that allows anyone who attended Kansas high schools for three years or graduated from a Kansas high school to receive an in-state tuition rate from state universities. More than 5,000 students who are not U.S. citizens have benefited from the policy. Many of them were brought to the country by their parents at a young age and have no clear path to citizenship. Being in the country without legal residency is a civil offense, not a crime.

During the Senate debate, Thompson and Sen. Virgil Peck, a Havana Republican who once suggested immigrants should be shot from helicopters because the practice works so well on feral pigs, falsely asserted immigrants were lawbreakers, that the state policy conflicts with federal law, and that the policy was costing taxpayers $600 million per year.

They met resistance from Senate Vice President Tim Shallenburger, R-Baxter Springs, and Sen. TJ Rose, R-Olathe.

Shallenburger said he had met with a young man who has lived in the U.S. since he was 15 months old.

“There is no path for citizenship for him. So what — so he’s just out of luck, is that the way it works?” Shallenburger asked.

Thompson: “There’s always a path for citizenship if you follow the law.”

Shallenburger said the man would have to return to his country of origin — and he doesn’t even know where he’s from — and then cross the border again before applying to be a citizen. Shallenburger asked where the man is supposed to go.

“Just Mexico? Would that do it?” he asked.

Thompson said he was certain the man could work with the State Department to figure it out.

“We’re talking about carving out individual exceptions, and at that point there is no rule of law,” Thompson said.

Shallenburger also challenged the notion, as promised by Thompson, that ending in-state tuition rates would save the state money.

According to Thompson’s confusing math: “Kansas has been in violation of federal law for 22 years by providing in-state tuition. It has cost us on the average $600 million per year. Add that up times 10 years, and that’s your stock. Talking billions of dollars that we’re providing for folks who are here illegally.”

The state Department of Labor, Department of Health and Environment, Department for Children and Families, Department for Aging and Disability Services, and Board of Regents all said the bill would have little or no fiscal impact.

Shallenburger said “we’re fooling ourselves if we think this saves $600 million.”

“I guarantee you, in next year’s budget, we’re not going to see any savings,” Shallenburger said. “So where did it go? Did it just vanish into the vapor? No, it’s just not true. These youth that have gone through our high schools will just not go to college, and that’s not making Kansas a better place. It’s not making them better people.”

“I think this is wrong, and so I’m not going to support this bill, and I hope the governor vetoes it,” he added.

Peck rushed to Thompson’s defense.

“We are talking about individuals who are breaking the laws of the United States by being here,” Peck said. “We’re not going to give special treatment to other lawbreakers, are we? I mean, that would be ridiculous.”

Thompson, who carried the bill, faced the brunt of criticism. Rose asked him a series of questions.

“Did the DACA students choose to be in our country illegally, or was it their parents?” Rose asked.

Thompson said he assumes they came with their parents.

“If their country of origin is a dangerous place, do you still think that they should return to that country of origin that’s dangerous that they’ve never been to before?” Rose asked.

Thompson suggested they seek asylum, an option that may not be available to them.

“Is America a compassionate nation?” Rose asked.

Thompson said America is “probably the most generous country in the entire world.”

“Are you compassionate for the taxpayer who is having a hard time paying their bills, and yet we’re handing out public benefits to people who are here illegally, who have violated the law by crossing this border illegally?” Thompson added. “Is it compassionate to the drug dealer who is operating a cartel in Oklahoma? Do we worry about what happens to them? We’ve got cartels all over the place because of the illegal drugs flowing into this country.

“Is it compassionate to the citizens, citizens who have to pay for that? I can’t answer that question. Compassion goes both ways, and it doesn’t make sense to try to pull heartstrings on this. Again, you either have the rule of law or you do not. Rule of law is compassion, because it sets standards for how this country operates, how this State operates.”

Rose had a final question.

“Would you say that the Bible demonstrates that God has a special place in his heart for not only the widow and the orphan but also the immigrants in our midst?” Rose asked.

Thompson quipped: “Jesus also was very adamant in saying, Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s.”

Rose said he believes in a just and compassionate United States.

“I will be voting no on this for the sake of the DACA student who is in this nation by no choice of their own,” Rose said. “They are pursuing the American dream in no different way than you or me, and as a just and compassionate nation, I believe that it is important that we treat them well.”