ED 150',923 TITLE INSTITUTION PUB DATE NOTE AVAILABLE FROM / EDRS PRICE DESCRIPTORS IDENTIFIERS ABSTRACT DOCUMENT RESUME ' HE 009 666 Higher Education in the 'States..Volume 6 Number 3 (Special Issue 1). , Education Commission of the States, Denver, Colo. 78 24p. Education Commission of the States, 822 Lincoln Tower Building, 1860 Lincoln. Street,, Denver, Colorado 80203 MF-$0.83 HC-$1.67 plus- Postage. Admission Criteria; Classification; *Court Litigation; Higher Education; *Laws; *Nonresident Students; *Residence Requirements; State Colleges; *State Legislation; State Universities; *15lition ° *States (Geopolitical Regions) Regulations governing classification of stddents for tuition purposes in each of the 50 states (including Guam-, Puerto Rico; and the Virgin Island's) are summarized. This s followed by .suFparies of a number of 'court cases challenging, the residency cl4ssification procedures used by public institutions ofhigher education. Each summary of state regulations indidates how many, sets' of regulations exist in the state and identities the body or agency that promulgated the rules. Further, each summary points out the basic requirement for resident status, exceptions to the rules, and appeal procedures if they exist. The cases summarized in the second section, relevant legal actions, involve questions of the right of public institutions to assess tuition charges, admission to public colleges or universities, and the reclassification of students who were initially considered nonresidents for 'tuition purposes. (SPG) 0 I , ****44***************************************************************, Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the. best that can be made ,*, from -the original document. *********************************************************************** N 1. c \ . 4 4 ,, 0 W4W LL tiSZ Z 41 4 Wz_v 0;: 40 14Ow , 0 4 W z 7 PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY / TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER AND USERS OF THE ERIC SYSTEM " 3HER EDUCATION IN THE STATES Volume 6, Number 3 (Special Issue I) 14- crs, In This issue: This is the first special issue of Higher Education in the States (a "bonus" issue for subscribe& to the three regular annual issues) of *hat we hope will be a ieries'of special reports requested by and of use to the d states In 1970 ECS published report by Robert F. Carbone entitled Resident or Nonresident? that examined the wide variety of practiCes An the various states determining residency or nonresidency of students for tuition purposes in public institutions of higher, education. The report, now out of print, included appendices containing summaries of state 'regulations 3318 relevant court cases as of early 1970. This issue revises and updates the state regulations in effect as of December'1977 (page 125) and updates 4 the relevant,court cases as of December 15,1977 (page 140). Publlshed by the Education Commissioh of the States 1978 Pa r 125-148 cp L( I: SUMMARY OF STATE REGULATIONS This section contains brie( su mmaries of regula- tions governing classification of students for tui- tion purposes in each state (including Guam, Puerto Rieo and the Virgin Islands) Each summary indicates how many sets of regulations exist to the state and identifies the body or agency that promulgated the rules Further, each summary points out the basic requirements for resident status, exceptions to the rules and appeal nroce- dures if they exist. Note that the term "parents" as used here means - the mother and/or father of the student, the person awarded legal custody or guardianship, the person who assumes responsibility for the student or the one upon whom the student is dependent. In these summaries an effort was made to translate the sometimes legalistic language to more common- ly understood terms., The descriptions of those states possessing several sets of regulations are of necessity more geniral in nature. The intention is to give the reader an overview of the xiiting rules i in each state. If specific details and efinitions used in any state are required, it OS adbisable to secure the complete statement of regulations from the appropriate institution or 'agency in that state. These summaries are not official statements of the rules of any state and should not be interpreted as such. It should be kept in mind that rules change, intentions are often difficult to ascertain and interpretations differ. ALABAMA 1 , A section of the Alabama Code stipulates that a student may not earn resident status while attend- ing a state institution, but the detailed policy for residency classification is made by the institutional trustees or administrators. As a result the policy varies among the colleges and universities. Several universities, especially those that are near the boundary of another state, have eliminated non- resident fees entirely. The state's system of junior ;and community colleges no longer levies a nonresi- dent fee on ,put -of -state stlidenti. At some univer- sities be made on or before then last day a student may register at the institution without penalty. MISSOURI fTwo sets Of regulations govern residency determi- nation in MinOuri. One was formulated ox the state's Commigsion on Higher Education and adopted by the six state colleges. The University,of. 'Missouri ''has its own regulations. However, both have some common feature's, such as the require- ment of 12 months of actual presence to qualify for resident status. Both cdnsider faculty, staff and military personnel (and the dependents :of all these)' as residents. The university grant$ resident .status to allimited category'of graduate students, those holding assistanceships requkring at least a 25. percent equiyalent emplOyment schedule and those holdingefelfowships that do not Include tuition. Southeast Missouri State extends residency to graduate students and foreign students. ReciprO. cal agreements with the University of Nebraska and the University of Kansas allow students who would .$ -132- 9 be classified as residents at the University of `Missouri to qualify for resident fees__mx the architec- ture Pilogram at Nebraska and the dental program at Kansas. In the state,-colleges a student may also claim resident status if he/she, or the parents register to vote in Missouri or pay at least $100 in state incometaxes. Nonresident students at the 'University of Missouri may apply their state income tax payments, if any, against tuition charges and, in the case of a minor student, his parent or guardian nay offset against tuition any state . income- tax they paid. Appeal procedures exist on all campuses with either a comanttee or an administrative officer designated ror this purpose. MONTANA In 1973 the Board of Regents of the Montana University System adopted rules for the determina-, - tiOn of fee status at state institutions Of higher education in Montana. As a general rule-, a student Must have been domiciled in Montana for 12 continuous months and have the intento become domiciled.in this state. In addition, any graduate of a Montana high school whose parents or guardian lived in the state at least brie full year of the two years immediately preceding his or' her graduation from high school will be considered a resident for not mote than five academic years if he 61*-she remains in continuous attendance at an institution ( in the state. The spouse of any resident student or person entitled to 'elas=lt,tion as a resident shall be considered an in -state student. Also, the spouse aid unemancipated children of a fully employed Or fully retired person who can show evidence or domiciliary intent may be eligible for in-state status without having lived in the state for 12 , continuous months. (This provision was established by state statute.) Appeals of Vonresident classifica- tions may be made to the Commissioner of Higher Education and the Board of Regents. The Board of Regents' . fee waiver policy provides that two percent of the total enrollment at any institution may be granted remission of the nonresident portion of tuition. NEBRASKA State law governs the classification of °students for tuition purposes in all public institutions of higher education in Nebraska. Emancipated minors, stu- dents of legal age and students not in the custody of parents, parent or guardian,. shall not be considered residents unless an affidavit of intent has been signed' stating that Nebraska is the student's pern'f'anent residence ard has been the permanent residence for one year immediately pnor to execution of the' affidavit. In addition, an emancipated minor must not have been supported . for two years or more 1,5rior to registration. A minor's residency follows. that of parents or guardi- an and such parents or guardian must have estab- lished a leorne in the state and intend to the state their, perinanent residence. A student does not lose residency st'Atus. when parents move if such student has the intention to make the state his /her permanent residence. A nonresident who marries a resident of the state is considered a resident for tuition purposes. Aliens who have started the naturalization. process and who intend to make the state their permanent residence are considered residents for tuition purposes. Depend- ents of staff members of the University of-'Nebras- ka or one of the state colleges and members/of the armed services, ox their dependents, on active duty and assigned permanent duty station within the state are also considered residents for tuition purposes. NEVADA 4 State statutes outline regulations for determining resident status for students at the University of Nevada in Reno anti Las Vegas and campuses of , the Community College Division of the University of Nevada System. If students or their families have been bona fide residents Of the state for six months prior to matriculation, they ,may be classi- fiedi,as residents for tuition purposes All university professional personnel, publit school teachers and teachers in private schools that meet certain cQrriculum requirements ate also considered to be residents. No assessment of ,out-of-state tuition is made for summer session attendance. Neither marriage nor movement of the family to another state affects the resident status of a student who has previously qualified, arid a student who once attended as a resident maintains that' statukunless he abandons his Nevada residencf'e and estaNishes a residence' elsewhere. Decisions of The admissions officer may be appealed to an appellate board for final determination. NEW HAMPSHIRE A student is classified as a residdnt or nonresident for tuition purposes at the time of admission- to the University of New Ham1hire System. The deci- sion, made by the director of admissions, is based upon information furnis4eYI by the student's cation and any 'other relevant information...All applicants living in New Hampshire are required to submit a ,notarized statement to the effect that their parents have been legally domiciled in New Hampsh4 continuously for a pdnod of at least 12 months immediately pnor to registering for the term for ,which the student is claiming in-state 133 - status. Students admitted from states other than New -Hampshire or from foreign countries are ' considered nonresident throughout their entire attendance at the university unless they shall have acquired bona fide domicile in New Hampshire. If the student maintains his/her residency apart from that of his /her parents, the student must clearly establish that his/her residence in New Hampshire is for some purpose other than the temporary one of bbtaining an education at the university. To qualify for in-state, status, the student must have been legally domiciled in New Hampshire contin- uously for a period of at least 12 months prior to registenng for the term for which in-state status is claimed. The burden.of proof in all cases is upon the applicant. In all cases the university reserves' the right to make the final decision as to resident status for tuition purposes. NEW JERSEY A student is classified as a resident for tuition purposes upon admission to a New Jersey public institution of higher education if the student or the parents or guardian upon whom the student is financially dependent has been a bona fide resident of the state for at least one year immediately prior to admission. A Atudent who, does not qualifyspis considered to be in the state only for the purpose of attending school. The Board of Higher Educa- tion has, established regulations -to identify a resident student who meets the state's require- ment. The governing board of ad institution may approve the remission of nonresident fees in excess of resident-fees for students of foreign nationality, up to 1 percent of the full-time enrollment. NEW MEXICO The Board of Educational Finance is diarged, with the responsibility of establishing residency regula- tions in New Mexico, and the regulations apply to all public institutions of higher education in the state. A student or his/her parents must have maintained a domicile in the states or 12 months prior to registration to qualify for resident status. A student (or his/her parents if studer4 is a minor) who moves to the state must satisfy the 12-month rule, declare intent to relinquish residency in other states and establish it in New Mexico and provide some evidence of efforts to carry out this intent (registenng to _vote, gainful impiloyment, etc.). Birth in New Mexico, descent from New Mexico forebearers or being related to alumni of colleges in the state dots not qualify a student for resident status. Public and parochial school teachers of nine months' service who intend to remain in the state are considered residents for tuition purposes. Arrangements for hearing appeals of nonresident classifications vary among the institutions in this state. NEW YORK The governing boards, of the State University of NeW York and thp City UniVersity of New York establish residenui re&ulations for their respective systems of higher education. The State'University of New York requires 'no minimum period- of residence to qualify a gtudent for resident status. If the student or his parents have established a doniicile in the state with intent to maintain it as a. permanent domicile, the student, is ,considered a resident for tuition .purposes. A state resident attending a City 'Univertity of- New York senior college is charged the same tuition rate as'a New York City resident. The City University determines a resident of New Yp-rk' City' or the state to be a person who has continuously maintained his br her principal place.of abode the city of New York or New York state for a period of at least 12 consecutiv months immediately preceding the first day of classes for the semester with respect to which the determination is made and will maintain his or her principal place'of abode irt, New Yo City or in the state. NORTH CAROLINA As a result of a ,majpr reorganization of public higher education in Nortti Carolina in 1972,, adhunistration, of classification of students by esiden'ce for tuition purposes was entrusted in 1973 to a reconstituted state residence committee under the Board of Governors of the,,University of North Carolina and the State Board of Education. Upon recommendation from the committee, the two boardf have adopted and periodically revise a residences manual, which embodies administrative and interpretiye policies relative to the residence classification law. The statute and the manual govern residence Assification for tuition purposes at the constituent university institutions and the community colleges and technical institutes. A.persori may qualify for in-state tuition status.by establishing legal res'idence in North Carolinaind maintaining that legal residence for .attleast 12 months immediately prior to classification. The legal residence of a stirdent's parents is prima facie evidence, but not necessarily conclusive evidence, of the student's legal. residence., The prima facie evidence rule_ does not operate against a student. 'who, Prior to the enrolled term in quegtion, has lived in North Carolina for five consecutive years. The legal residence of married pelsons, irrespective - 134 -* br of sex, is to be detenhined, gas with unmarried persons, by reference to all relevant evidence of residentiary intent. 'The_i'fact of marriage tb a nonresident does not prece one from maintain- ing North Carolina legal' residence,. nor does the fact of marriage to a resident cause one io acquire North Caroiina. legal residence. Hqwever, if * any point in time, both spouses have become North 'Caralina legal residents, then each spouse may claim the duration pf legal residence of the two, winch is "the longer (With .reference to the 12- Month durati6tIal requirement). Service in the armed forces outside North Carolina does not of itself cause loss 'of reatdent tuition status. If a student who is enrolled and is enjoying 'in -state tuition status loses North Carolina legal, residence, that student may'continue enrolled at the in-state tuition rate for a 12-manth grace period. Residen- 'nary classifications' are subject to appeal review 'successively. a ('!ampustleziel agent or committee and to the state residence committee. Each institu- tion establishes the details of it's own classification, and appeal- review procedures and the committee' has its own policies mid procedures. NORTH DAKOTA 'State law defines the qualifications for resident' status in all North Dakota institutions of higher education. A student or his/her parents (or guardi-- an) must have resided in the state 12 months prior to*Ins` /her registration to qualify for resident fees. However, if the parents (or guardian) show proof of -intent to establish residence in this state for a period of years" the student may be declared a resident f r tuition purpose. Others exempt from payment of non sidept fees are military personnel and their dependents stationed in the state, de . pendents of faculty members at any institution of higher Iearning'in the'state and ,persons married to residents of- the state. In 1,973 an appeal procedure was amended into the nonresident law that pro- vides that "any student who, because of peculiar;or unusual circumstances, is aggrieved by-the above definition of a nonYesident student, may appeal to, the Board of Higher Education and the board shall, if 'it. determines the circumstances, justify such action, admit such student to 'the institution of higher learning,as- a resident fo'turtion purposes." A. 1977 amendment redtwed the age level from to 18 years, the Aarliest age the 121month waiting period can begin. Z141-110- The Ohio Board of Regents through legislative mandate establishes 'a statewide residency, rule whose objective is to "exclude from treatment as s V . Ole siderits those who .are -present ii( the state nmarily for the purpose of attending 'a state- . supported college or- university.'-' In general, 12' m nths is the period required' to establish -resi- dency for tuition purposes. There are -tWo excep- tio \is to the 12-month rule. Immediate residency is awarded to persdns who are living and are gainfully errilloyed on a self-sugtairung basis in Ohio and wh are enrolled as part -time students. 'Immediate rest ency i also granted to a person on -active duty , statts in, the United States military who is' sta- . honed and resides in Ohio.The,dependents of the military person are also granted imm&liate resi- denty. A resident, student .whose parents move out of state while the student is enrolled retains his residency status until the completion of his or lIer-' degree provided, he or shet, is continuously enrollecl during hat'period (summers excludN).- OKLAHOr The Qklahoma StareRegents for Higher Education ' have estabhshed policy on res,idency determination - that governs the classification of students in all public higher education institutions. An.emanci-. pated min'or or an :adult student who- enters the state can Rant\ resident status in 12 . months provided this peiod comes before he first enrolls.' Adults who enter the/ state to work fu'l time, -- practice a profession ELY operate a business, can ' immediately take four credits (three' in summer session) at residen ates. IT parents rriove into the state, with the int ntion of remaining as residents, their dependent c ildren immediately assume resi- dent status. Milit ry personnel stationed in, the state,and their de endents.are exemptt non- resident :on- resident /fees and in 5brne institutions faculty members, their dep ndents and graduate assistants are classified as, re idents for tuition purposes. A . nonresident woma who marries a resident can attain resident stat s upon.- next .registering, but this does not appl tv a nonresident Man Who marries a resident. r resident woman does not lose her resident status because she Marries a nonresi- dent. Appeals , CO s mittees are Sound on each campus' governed by these regulations. APEGON 1 The State Board of Higher Education sets policy governing residence ' classification for all public r institutions in Orego . The dependents of parents who enter the state. ith the intent of establishing a permanent clpmicile,are immediately considered residents. Single adults and emancipated. minors . may qualify by 6 months actual residence prior to ehrolling and" 12 months after enrolling if, in the latter situation, they also establiSh,.a bona fide -,, . si ti 135,12 permanent residence. Federal employees, both" military and civilian, are considered residents as are all students who hold degrees from accredited institutions (except medical and dental students). 'Faculty members and their dependents are covered by the rule regarding those' who enter- the state to establish permanent residence. Graduates of Ore- 'gon high schools who enter as 'freshmen' maintain their resident status even though their parents may leave the` state. addition41 exemption's are granted .to'sumnier session students, those taking less than seven credits and those taking extension or corres- pondence courses. An interinstitutional committee hears appeals and may waive nonresident fees for up to 5 percent of the total nonresident enrollment for "good and sufficient reasons." The State4 Scholarship Commission may `award fee remission amounting to 10 percent of all nonresident fees .collected to "qualified students from other states° who are in need of financial assistance." 'Aliens,, except those on student visas, may earn residency,- and a resident woman married to a nonresident maintains resident status only if her parents contin- ue to assume her college costs. Voting in another state is considered evidence of nonresideht status. PENNSYLVANIA There are two sources of regulations for determin- ing Ilesideri'cy classification in Pennsylvania: the Board of State College and University Directorg (for 13 state collV'FStand Indiana University);.and the Auditor General (for Pennsylvania Slate Uni- versity, Temple Univefsity and the University of Pittsbuth). Not less than 12 months continuous residence in the state by the student or'his parents, qualifies hini for resident status in .all'institutions. Exemptions to these regulations vary among the institutions. Generally, the state colleges do not provide any exemptions except for military person- nel and, their dependents stationed in the state and for veterans returning to their homes in the state. The major' universities exempt faculty and staff 'members and their dependents, government em- ployees assigned in the state and military personnel who maintain that state as, a home of record. Appeal arrangements vary but usually an adminis- trative officer or body on each ,campus is _desig- nated to handle reclassification or appeal cases. PUERTO RICO The residence or a student is not a relevant consideLtion in the assessment of tuition or fees at the University of Puerto Rico.* *Information as contained in the 1970 survey. No updated information for Puerto Rico was received as of December 1, 1977. RHODE ISLAcID _ For the purpose of determining a student's classifi- cation as resident or nonresident, the word resi- crence Shall mean a student's true, fixed and permanent home and place of habitation. The term, "emancipated student" shall mean a student who has attained the age of 18 years and wh6se parents are no lOnger under legal obligation tp support or maintain such student. 'An emancipated student must establish a bona fide residence in the state for one year immediately preceding the first class day of the first term of registration. Any unemanci- patvg student whose parents qualify as residents shall be considered a resident student. A student from another state, or foreign country. who is enrolled for a full program at a public college or university will be considered not to have estab- lished residence. Continued presence in Rhode Island during vacation periods will not, of itself, admit .a change of classification. A student whose parent is a member of the armed forces and stationed in Rhode Island purspant to military orders shall be entitled to classrfication as a resident student. The dean 9f admissions of each institution shall classify each person qualified for admission to a public college or university. Any student who claims that his status has changed may request the dean to redetermine his clas'sification. A student may appeal the dean's decision to the board of residence review, whose decision shall be final. , SOU(T1-1\CAR0LINA Student residency requirements for the purpose of paying tuition and fees at state-supported colleges and :universities are established by the General Assembly. Briefly, the laws extend Sin-state topersons who have been domiciled in South Carolina for a period of no less than 12 months with the intention of making a permanent home therein, or in the case of unemancipated minors, whose parents have been so domiciled. A "minor" is a person who has nbt attained the age of 1,8. For the purpose of paying tuition and fees, the following categories of personnel are considered , South Carolina residents regardless of length of domicile in the state: (1) full-time faculty and administrative employees of state institutions and the spouses and children of such employees', (2) spouses and children of active members7,-of the artned services and active federal employees sta'-:. tioned 'in South Carolina, (-3) persons and their spouses and unemancipated childrelit who have been domiciled in South Carolina for legs than 12 months but who hke fultitime employment ih the' state. The governing board of the institution may 136 adopt policies for the abatement of any part or all of the nonresident increment of tuition and fees for students who are recipients of scholarship aid. The Commission on 'Higher Education prescribes uniform rules for file application of the laws regarding residency. The implementation of the rules of residency is a responsibility of the institu- tion. Each has establiped procedures for determin- ing .residenCy upon enrollment, and for the student to appeal the, determihati6n if desired. SOUTH DAKOTA3L'o: The South Dakota bard of Regents determines residencx policy for public' institutions. The par- ents of a minor.applying for admission are consid- ered residents of South Dakota if they have established a permanent residence- within the state at least six months immediately prior to, the date of the minor's matriculation at a state institution. A minor admitted before his /tier parents have resided six months in the state will be reclassified as a xt1egistration after his pSrents have had, in-state residency for six months. ':.k minor whose parents move out- f-state ered a nonresident , commenci "with the first registration after' six months from the date of parents' move. `A resident student 18 years old or over is one whose parents were residents of the state at the time the student reached 18, or who, while an adult, has_ established 'residency by being in the state six months immediately prior to registration. A nonresident student,who reaches 18 years of age while a student does not automatically attain residence status. Individuals moving into the state as a r Cult of militarw or civil ordeis, or a minor child f such persons; qualifies for residency status of er 12, months. Marriage of a nonresident to a per'S-on who is classified as a resident qualifies the nonresident spouse for residency. An ,alien who established a residency' 4 living in South Dakota at least 12 months prior to registration is classified as a resident. Any person on full contract to a college or university or classified as a graduate assistant on a contract and his/her dependents will be classified as residents. Residency' classification may be ap- peale'd to the Board of Regents. During such appeal the student is classified as nonresident. TENNESSEE A policy govttning residency classification for all public 4highei education institutions in Tennessee lAS been developed through the cooperative"efforts, bf the governing boards and the Tennessee Hig Education 'Commission. Children of parents wh .4c establish legal dpmiciles in the state are normally considered residents for tuition purposes while single individuals qualify for, resident status if they have been employed in the state for 12 months while not a full-time student. An adult or married student who dwells in a house on his own property in Tennessee is considered a resident. Wives gener- ally assume the husbands status but they may qualify independently on other grounds. Nonresi- dent miles who marry resident females are classi- fied as residents in assessing tuition charges, as are aliens who intend to become-citizens or Aho are on permanent' visas. Military persondel stationed in the state and their dependents, and veterans with 12 months sell ice' who elect to settle in Tennessee, are also granted resident status. In same institu- tions graduate students with teaching, research or project assistants are not required to pay nonresident fees. ppeals are heard by special committees in eac stitution and further appeals may be carried to the governor ards. TEXAS. The basic regulations covering residency determina- tion in Texas are found in the civil ;statutes. The Coordinating Board, Texas College and University System, has provided a detailed interpretation and a set of operational definitions for the guidance of postsecondary institutions in the state. Gainful employment and maintenance of a domicile in the . state for at least 12 months prior to enrolling are the basic requi1ements for qualifying a person (but excluding aliens on ,temporary visas) or his /her, dependents for, resident status. Fersons in the following categories (incruding aliens on temporary visas) are also considered to be residents ,for tuition purposes: new faculty members or employees, of public colleges and universities and their depend- ents; teaching, research and project assistants in the institutions; military personnel ,stationed in the state and their dependents,.dependents of rthlitary personnel whose last immediate assignment' was in Texas, survivors of military personnel- killed while in the service. Nonresidtnts (excluding alieris on( temporary viasa), whether they are male or female, who marry residents qualify for resident status, and residents who marry nonresidents maintain their status as long as they do not adopt the legal domicile of the .spouse. Special committees or, designated administrative offices are authorized to hear appeals of nonresident classification-on each , of the college or university campuses. UTAH. , Me,mber institutions of the Utah State System of Higher Education are governed by rules and regula- tions established by the Board'of Regents. Resi- dence for a 12-month period prior to enrollment qualifies an adult student'for resident status. A 'minor whose parents move,to Utah to establish permanent domicile shall immediately be eligible for residency status. A student maintains residency' status even when his/her family leaves the state. An emancipated minor may qualify, for residence under' rules that apply to a single adult. Aliens with permanent resident status may qualify according to applicable criteria for other citizens of the state. Military personnel assigned to active -duty in Utah; their spouses and children, may be entitled to residency status for tuition pur oses. Upon termi- nation of military duty status, they are governed by standards applicable to n military persons. Students may appeal the residency classification ruling by an admissions officer to the institution's board of appeals for residency matters, the estab- lishment, membership and procedures of which are governed by institutional regulations approved by the individual institutional councils. - VERMONT The two higher education governing boards, ih Vermont establish residency regulations for the institu tion s er e oth require that a student must have been continuous y miciled in the state for one year prior to the_ date o application for a change to Vermont residency status. D,omicile for residency purposes means a person's true, fixedInd permanent home to thich he intends to return when absent. Marital status shall not determine residency. Whenever a resident student loses Vermont domicile, as in the case of minor whose parents move from the state, he/she shall be reclassitied as nonresident. The Vermont State Colleges an the University of Vermont have committees on residence that hear and appeals.' VIRGIN ISLANDS Residency regulations at the College, of the,Virgin Islands were proposed by the college administra- tion and approved by the Board of Trustees. They establish a minimum period domicile of one year for the student or his paren a a basic qualification for resident status. Marriage to a nonresident or an alien does not disqualify a resident student. If a nonresident marries a resident -he/she qualifies far resident status An 12 months. Some scholarship funds are available to nonresi- dent students that, in, effect, exempt them from nonresident fees. Faculty and staff members and their dependents are considered residents for tui-' tion , purposes without a qualifying period.. A ) student at the college may appeal to the dean if he or she seeks a change in classification.* VIRGINIA . i . The policy governing classification ofrastudentfor4 i 4 the purpose of paying in-state tuition is,aonta Fedi in the Virginia aide'. Basiqly, a studerit ImuYt a I ' bona fide domiciliary resident, of Virginuit f r a 'period of at least, one yer prior tothe co rnmerice- ment of the term, semester or quarter for, which he or she receives the privilege. To be a domiciliary of Virginia, one must reside in the state with the unqualified intention of remaining in Virginia for The period immediately after leaving the ins itution and indefinitely thereafter. One canno be a domtiliary of Virginia if ,one resides in irginia solely for the purpose of securing an educ tion. A student who is a minor ordinarily to es tke domiciliary residence of the parent (eit er tfie father or the mother). An exception to the domiciliary residence, requirement is p ovided, under certain conditiont to a ,studfn whose parent or spouse is stationed in Virgin a while serving ins the 'military. Such a, student- may be eligible to pay in-state ,tuition if dre p ,rent or spouse has lived in Virginia Li at least ne year prior to the student receiving the privil gel been employed full-time and paid-personal inc me'taxes. to the state. WASHINGTON State law establishes the regulations for classifying students as residents or nonresidents for tuition and fee purposes in all public colleges and univer- sities in Washington. If the student or the parents, if he or she is a minor, have maintained a domicile in the state for one year prior to registration for more than sik credit hours per term, the student is classifiethas a resident. childrenlof.federal employ- ees residing in the state and families of faculty and staff members, at the institutions are granted resident status immediately% personnel stationed in the state and their dependents are also classified as residents, as are aliens on permanent visas. The University of Washington and Washing- ton State University are allowed to waive nonresi- dent fees for up to 100 graduates of colleges from "friendly foreign nation's." In addition to state- funded tuition and fee waivers and state need grants for resident students, nonresidents are eligi- bleto participate in the state work-study program. Appeals-or requests for reclassification are handled by designated administrative officers or special *Information as contained in the 1970 survey. No updated Information for the Virgin Islands was received as of December 1, 1977. - 138 - I 17' committees. on each campus in accordance with uniform guidelines. WEST VIRGINIA Policy regarding classification of students for ad- mission and fee purposes has been established by the West Virginia Board of Regents. The big factor in gaining resident classification is West Virginia domicile at least 12 months of continuous residence within the state prior to the date of registration. Bona fide' domicile means that the student must not be in the state priMarily to attend an education institution and he/she must be in the state for purpbses other than to qualify for resideAt status. The residence of a married person is determined by the same rules of domicile that would apply if he or she were not married. Persons assigned' to full-time military service and residing in West Virginia may be classified as in-state residents for tuition and fee purposes after 12 months continuous location in tile state. Decisions of the designated institutional officer charged with dcter- mination of residence classification may be ap- pealed to the president of the institution. Presi- dential decisions regarding residency: may be appealed to the Board of Regents. Wisconsin statutes have established rules for deter- mining the residency classification of students for tuition purposes in institutions in the University of Wisconsin System. To cltialify as a resident, an adult student (1$ years or older) or parents of a minor student must have resided in the state one year prior to -matriculation in a University in the system. A minor student who is a child of divorced or legally separated patents, an orphan or a child under guardianship can qualify if that person "resided *bStantially" in. Wisconsin during the 4 years of minority and at least a year before registering at an institution in the systenI. Military personnel and "persons 'engaged in alternative service ", stationed in the state and their dependents -are granted resident status. A person. who has graduated from a Wisconsin high school and whose _parents are residents of the state for a year before the student registers (or whose parents were residents of the state for a year before their deaths) is a resident. The regent& may remit nonresident tuition to a number of needy and worthy nonresi- dent students not exceeding 8 percent of the nonresident enrollment of the respective institu- tions in the prior year. They may grant tuition remissions to a number of students not exceeding 2 percent of nonresidents registered in the preceding year who are deemed to be attending under 4 "extraordinary circumstances." The regents may also remit nonresident ttaton to "worthy and needy" foreign students or U.S. citizens from outside the United States, comprising up to 2 percent of the total enrollment of students at the respective institutions .for the prior year. The regents may grant tuition remissions to teaching fellows and assistants Sand as athletic scholarships "up to the maximum number alloWed by the appropriate athletic conference." Each member of the legislature may award one scholar4hip to a nonresident student that has the effect of granting resident status to the recipient. Appeals for reclas- sification are handled -1;y committees on the individual campuses. Reciprocal agreements with .Michigan and Minnesota provide for the exchange of students between these states and Wisconsin specified conditions. WYOMI Regulations governing the classification of students as resident or nonresident for purposes of tuition are administered by each institution. For the University bf Wyoming, a minor whose parent is domiciled in the state is_considered a resident. An adult who has established his or her domicile in Wyoming and who has resided in the state for a continuous period of one year immediately preced- ing registration is considered a resident, except that living in the state primarily for the purpose of gaining an education does not qualify for residency purposes: For the purpo;se of this regulation; an adult is an individual 21 years of age or more, or a married person under that age maintaining a household in Wyomirlg with his/her spouse. An individual temporarily. absentfrom the state due to military service, going to school or other tempo- rary absence of a known duration, who retains the intention of returning'to the state and who would have been classified as a resident at the time of departure, retains resident status provided such person enter an education institution within one year following termination of,absence. In general, spouses are accorded -16* same residence status. Persons other than U.S. citizens admitted for permanent residence shall be classified as nonresi- dents. A decision of the director of admissions may be appealed to the residence classification,gommit- tee. Such appeal must be submitted within 20 days of the beginning of the _semester for which a classification change is requested. In the community colleges, a student may be classified as a Wyoming resident if he/she meets at least one of several criteria: (a) his or her parents consider the state as their permanent home atthe time of registration; (b) the student enrolls at a _1313 _16 community college for the fall term immediately following graduation frchn a Wyoming high school, (c) the student receives substantiality all support from a resident pf the state Qther than a parent, (d) the 'studegi'it, has 'left military service .,pr the Peace Corps within one Year prior to registration and was ,a resident at the time of entry into such service; (e) s IL RELEVANT- LEGAL ACTIONS There have been a number of court cases challeng- ing the residency classification, procedures used by public institutions of higher education. These cases involve questions of the right of putThc institutions to assess tuition charges, admission to public colleges or universities and the reclassification of students who were initially considered nonresi- dents for tuitiop purposes The brief summaries '- provided below attempt to cover the major issues in each case ARIZONA Arizona Board* of Regents u. Harper, 108 Az. 223, 495 Pac. 2644 ALR3d. 627 (1972). Citing' a variety of reason's, a group of students sought instate residency classification. A lower r court decision ruled in favor of the students. Upon appeal, the Supreme Court reversed the lOwer courts decision, thus upholding the implied power 'Citr- of the , Board of Regents to impose a residency requir ent. AllKAN\SAS James E Darr, Jr , et-al v. D. P. Raney; et al., No. F-70-C-15 (.971-)\\ A class action suit challenging the University of Arkansas nonresident fee regulation resulted in an agreement between the plaintiffs and defendants on the forth and substance Of a revisicrn,to the regulations. The court decree invalidated the exist- ing,student fee regulations concerning nonresidents and directed the university to adopt and apply new regulations governing the classifications of students at in -state and out-of-state for the purposes of determining student fees. The changes created by this decision are now reflected in the state's residency (oblations. CALIFORNIA ,.....-43ryan v. Regents of Univer;sity of California. 188 Cal. 559,205 Pac. 1071 (1922). the student has resided in the state for a continu- ous period of at least one year prior to rgistration,, (f) the student, and/or hisiher spouse, is ,making a permanent residence in the state and is gainfully , employed on a permanent basis at the time of registrtfon, or is married to a bona fide resident. i 1. :4, This-case was brought on behalf of a minor whose par is is fia,f4 resided in California 11 months prior to t e date she sought to enter the iversity. She N wa classified a nonresident because e 'statutory qu fying period was one year prior to initial re ftration. It was argued that the residencHaw wad' unconstitutional because of a state consti- , u final provision that,prohibits granting privileges to any citizen that "... shall not be granted to all .. ci ens. The court agreed that the stu4ent was,a ci }ten but held that residency classification at the it brilversity was not unreasonable or arbitrary. The r, opinion stated that in view of the fact that there is ai3One-year qualifying period for voting privileges, ij,' There seems to be no good,reason for'hofding t lit the legislature may not make a similar o, c ssification in fixing the privilege, for attending te state university.' I . i *irk v. Board of Regents of the University of :alifornia, 78 Cal. Rptr. 260 (1969). . `.. , in this case a resident of Ohio married a California gsident and shortly thereafter sought to enter the niversity of California. She was classified a onresident for tuition purposes under the univer- ity requirement of a,one-year qualifying period. he suit was based on the recent nullification of residency requirements for welfare recipients. The court ruled in favor of the university, commenting that the welfare case "... involved the,iminediate and pressing need for preservation of life- and )Heal;health ..." but ,that :the present case did not th simifar risks. The case was decided by the California Court ot Appeals and subsequently the United States Supreme /Court refused fohear'the Case, ,,thus--upholding Ae decision of the Court of Appeals. * ....Wong v. Board of Trustees, CalifoMia State Unwer- sity and Colleges, 53 Cal.'Ap. 3rd 705 (1975). s J The plaintiff sued for the right to claim residency immediately upon receiving perrnanent resident status in the United State.s. The court found that a permanent resident' registered alien must reside within the Mate , of California for at least 1'2 1 140 - 1 1.1 4 w .1 consecutive months before being qualified for k resident status 414t COLORADO Landwehr v. Regents of University of Colorado, k 156 colo. 1, 396 Pac. (2d) 451 (1964). The plaintiff sought refund of nonresident tuition paid during his four years at the University of Colorado plus punitive damages. Sections of the United States and the , Colorado constitutions .guaranteeirig equal protection, 'due process and equal rights and privileges\ court were cited. The cou ruled .that the matter of classifying students as residents or nonresident( by the,,university was authorized by the states and only open to question if it amount to an unreasonable and 4arbitrary classification. The conclusion of the court ' stated: "It is our considered vie* that this classifi- cation is not arbitrary or unreasonable and is not so lacking in foundation as to contravene the constitutional provisions." Covell v. Douglas, °179 Colo. 443, 501 P2d 1047 (1972). The appellant challenged a statute thattin effect, established a presumption of nonresidency for tuition purposes as to formerly classified. out-of- state students and sought to have the partitular section of the statute declared unconstitutional. The statute provided that an out-of-state full-time student could not qualify for a change in class ifica- tion for tuition purposes unless he/she had spent 12 continuous months in residence while not attending an institution of,higher education in the state. The Colorado Supreme Court, adopted, the rule declared in Kline v. Vlandis, .3Mk Supp 526 (D.C. Conn, 1972) and in Carrington i. Rash, 380 U.S. 89, 85 S. Ct. 775 that a conclusive presump- tion,may not be utilized to classify a person as a nonresident when he is in fact a resident. The court held that the conclusive presumption established in the statute imposed -an invidious discrimination which violated the. 14th Amendment. The' court found Covell distinguishable* from Landwehr v. Regents, 156 Colo 1, 396 P2d 451, and noted that Laridwehr's challenge 'regarding the disparity in amounts charged in-sand out-of-state students was based upon the privileges and immunities clause in Article IV, Section 2 of the United States Constitu- tion. It specifically reaffirmed the Landwehr ruling that the classification of students applying for admission to state tax -sir ported universities irito in -state and out-of-state oups is npt arbitrary or unreasonable, and does n t violate the privileges and. immunities clause. CONNECTICUT /' - Vlandis 93S. Ct. 2230 (1973); In John :W: Vlandis v. Margaret Marsh, Kline and. Patricia Cat.apana, the plaintiffs sought to force the state of Connecticut to allow nonresidents to establish residency for tuition purposes. 'Thk, law stated that the state required nonresidents enrolled in the state university system to pay tuition and other fees at higher, rates than residents and. provided irreversible And irrebutable statutory pre- sumptioi that because the legal address of a student; if married, is outof, state at the time of, application for admission or, if single, is out of state at some point during the. preceding year, he/she remains a nonresident as long as he or. she is a student.. in Connecticut. The United States Supreme Court (No. 72-493, June II, 1973) found that standards of dueIprocess require Connecticut to allow individuals the opportunity to present evidence showing that they are bona fide residents and d entitled to in-state rates. Subsequent state law amended the residency- requirements and allow nonresidents this opportunity. FLORIDA Weitzel v. State, F4a.App. (1st), 30 (1975). This case upheld Rule 7.6, Florida Board of Regents' Operating Manual and further upheld the authority of the regents to impose specific prereq- , uisites for Florida student designation. The rule is as follo*s: "For the purpoie of assessing registra- tion fees, students shall be classified as Florida and non-Florida. A Florida student is a person who shall have resided ant had his domicile in the State of Florida for at least twelve (12) months immedi- ately preceding the first day of classes of the current term." 7 So.2d 1881 Board of Regents of the Department of Education v. John S. Harris, 338 So.2d 215 (Fla. 1 DCA 1976).` A student brought action to recover a portion of tuition,contending that he should have qualified as ,a Florida', student for tuition purposes. A circuit court upheld his case; the university appealed. The District Court of Appeal reversed the decision and ruled that where a student was a minor he lacked legal capacity to establish a Florida domicile separate and apart from his parents; and that in order to qualify for resident tuition rate, at was necessary not only to establish domicile but to evidence that domicile by dtfrational residence of 12 months. - 1 411 8 HAWAII There have been no actual relevant court cases in Hawaii related to residency for the purposes of tuition. However, several attorney general opinions have been submitted: (1) Att. Gen. Op. 69-13, which discussed the implication of Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 US 61,8, on validity of tuition differential for resident and nonresident students; (2) Att. Gen. Op. 69-16, on nonresident tuition and how applitability to graduate students and residence qualifications is construed; and (3) Att. Gen. Op. 71-13, upholding that graduate students from states with uniform graduate tuition fees are not exempt from payment of nonresident tuition fees. In addition a case note (363 F. Supp1677) upheld that the 12-month durational resi ency requirement is valid. IDAHO ewman v. Graham et al., State Board of Educa- t on, 82 Ida. 90, 349 Pac. (2d) 716 (1960). After completing one year as a nonresident student at Idaho State College (now Idaho State Univer- sity), the plaintiff sought to register as a resident for tuition purposes. The Idaho, residency regula- tions required that if a student was properly classified as a nonresident upon initial admission he would maintain that classification throughout his continuous attendance at any public Idaho college or university.. The court ruled that while the Board of Education had the right to establish necessary rules and regulations, the regulation requiring a student's original residency classification tO go unchanged was "arbitrary, capricious and unrea- sonable." Thus, it held that the plaintiff should be reclassified as a resident because he had complied with all other requirements for establishing resi- dence. .1bInA Clarke v Redeker et al., 259 F. Supp. 117 (1966) The plaintiff, a resident of Illinois, attended the State University of Iowa as a nonresident student. He later married an Iowa resident and entered the law school where again he was classified as a nonresident for tuition purposes. He contended in his suit that this classification violated the equal protection and privileges and immunities clauses of the 14th Amendment and that the regulations discriminate against a nonresident male whose wife w is, a resident. Further, he contended he was a resident of the state. The court ruled that interpre- tation of the residency regulations followed by the university's residency review committee tends to A /prevent the regulations from being unreasonable or trary limits on the student's privileges. Further, it held that he had established a substantial basis for being classified as a resident for tuition purposes and suggested that the review committee be given an opportunity to reconsider the case in light of this opinion. Subsequently. Clarke' was reclassified a resident and neither party in the case appealed further. 7 Clarke v. Redeker et al., 406 F (2d) 883, 8th Cir. (1969) In a second case involving the same parties as in the case reported above, the student sought: damages for being charged nonresident fees in the years prior to his first suit (1964-67). The court hgld that where a student in his first suit sought an injunction ,agzinst enforcement of tuition regula- tions, he could not seek damages in a second suit for being charged nonresidents fees. It said that the question of payments was a matter that might haie been and should have been determined in the original case. Johns v. Redeker and Twist v. Redeker, 406 F (2d) 878, 8th Cir. (1969) Both of these cases 'sought injunctions and damagei with Kespect to the Board of Regents requiring nonresident students in public universities in Iowa to pay a higher tuition than that assessed residents of the state. Twist intervened in the original action brought by Johns. The courts allowed both cases to be prosecuted as class actions; that is, on behalf . of the plaintiffs and all other persons similarly situated. The allegation was that the assessment of higher. fees deprived the plaintiffs of their rights under the equal protection clauses of. the 14th Amendment. The original trial court refused to convene a three-judge court on the grounds that no substantial federal question was present, basing its decision in part on the Clarke case'reported above. The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this ruling. In a subsequent appeal, the United States Supreme Court refused to hear the cases. KENTUCKY Hayes `v. Board of Regents of Kentucky State University, 362 F.Supp. 1172 (E.D.Ky. 1973). In 1972 the plaintiff registered to vote in the state of Kentucky, applied for in-state tuition rates at Kentucky State. University and was denied. A suit was brought before the district court in which the plaintiff claimed that registering to vote is 'evidence of residency within a state and that the guidelines laid down by the Council on Higher Education requiting proof of the intent to maintain residency in the state were unconstitntional. The court upheld the univ'ersity and an appeal was lodged with the appelate court in Hayes v. Board of Regents of Kentucky State, University, 495 P.d 1326, 6th Cir. (1974). The district court's decision was affirmed. It was stated that voter registration was not conclusie proof for tuition purposes and that the existing guidelines' set down by the -douncil on higher .Education to show intent are valid Criteria. - MARYLAND Edkins ux Moreno, No. 17-154, United States Supreme Cotirt, pending in December 1977. In May 1975, studerits at the University of Matyland brought suit in the distnct court against the 'universityand its president. The students challenged the university's policy of denying in- state status for tuition to holders ,of G-4 visas or those wh%,,are financially dependent on persons holding such. nonimmigrant status. The district court on July 13, 1976, said that by the use of a presumption of nondornicile for G-4 aliens, the university denied the* plaintiffs the opportunity- to demonstrate tnat they were entitled to in-state status for ,purposes of tuition and charge differen- tials. The students had relied first and foremost on the Viand's v. Kline, 412 U.S. 441 (1973), case which held that an unconstitutional "permanent" irrebut- table presumption of nonresidence was created by a Connecticut statute that denied an out-of-state applicant for adniission to a public college adjust- ment to in-state status for the entire period of his/her attendance at the school, when that pre- sumption was not universally true in fact. The decision of the district court was affirmed by the U.S. court of appeals. The university sought review by the Supreme Court, which was granted in October 1977. The university urged the Su- :, preme Court to lay to rest a fundamental misappli- cation of the irrebuttable presumption doctrine,. The University contended that the judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals fdr the 4th Circuit should be reversed and Vlandis v. Kline, supra, should be "overruled. In the October 1977 brief of the American Council on Education, et al., the conclusion stated that because of the deleterious effect of Vlandis on a host of state legislative judgments, including ration- ally based tuition. ppl es of public colleges and t universities, and in ht of the importance of discarding the irrebuttable presumption doctrine, amici urge that the court reverse the judgment pf the U.S. Court of Appeals fo the 4th Circuit4nd that in so doing the court overrule Vlandis v. Kline, supra. It is anticipated that the Supreme Court will hear oral argument during either its February or March term. A decision will be rendered by July 1978. MISSISSIPPI Edward R. Jagnandan, et al v. ,William L. Giles, et al., No. EC73-9-K (1974). This self 7"styled case challenged the constitution- ality of Section 37-103-23 of the Mississippi Code 1972 that stated "All aliens are classified as nonresidents" for the purpose of tuition. and tees at state-supported institutions. A three-judge fed- leral panel declared the section unconstitutional and ruled that "... aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States,- who reside in the State of Mississippi. . .." cannot be charged fees and tuition in excess of those charged state residents. A further attorney general opinion noted that this judgment affected only,,,.dliens attending institutions of higher 19.rning in the state and those admitted as permaned residents and the opinion excepted the voting requirement as aliens cannot vote until they are accorded citizenship. Attorney General Opinion, Oc 'tober 17, 1973. An attorney general opinion cited several cases in the state of Mississippi that related to residency for tuition purposes; (1) Ginger v. Fortune, WC 73-90K, related to the student's right to reclassifi- cation as a resident for fees assessment;, (2) Hubbard u. McKay, 193 Sq.2d 129, 132, related to domicile; and (3)Cheek v. Fortune, 3,41 F. Supp. 729 (N.D. Miss.')A6lating to assessmitnt of nonresi- dent tuition. The opinion held that in order to become a resident for tuition purposes, a nonresi- dent minor must have resided in the state with the intent to establish domicile for at least 12 months after reaching the age of majority (21 years), and that the mere fact that an individual has been initially classified as a nonresident for tuition purposes while attending a college and/or univer- sity does riot bind him or her to that classification while in pursuit of, an education (see Vlandis v. Kline, Connecticut). NORTH CAROLINA W. C. Barker v. Iowa Mutual Insurance Co. 85 S. E. (2d) 305 (1955). - 143 4O 1 This was actually an insurance case in which a nian biought suit to recover damages resulting from a' fire that destroyed prOperty belonging to his son , who was a nonresident student in a North Carolina university. In a statement somewhat incidental to the primary issue of the case, 'the North Carolina court held that a student who domes frorri another state and who enrolls in a public college or university remains a nonresident-student insofar as tuition is concerned. Hall v. Wake County Board of Elections 187 S.E. 2d 52 (1972). In the context of determining residence for pur- poses of county precinct voter registration, the North Carolina Supreme Court catalogued' general law On domicile (legal residence) and noted that a student '"who leaves his _parents' home to enter college" is presumed "not domiciled in the college town to which he goes" but that the presumption is rebuttable by evidence that the student has the intent to make that place his "permanent home of itidefinite duration," i.e., his 'domicile. The fact situation in this case involved asserted domicile in the .county based. in part on residence in a college dormitory. Because of prior findings by the trial court judge, the North- Carolina Supreme Court, however, did not undertake to, determine whether or not the student was in fact a domiciliary of the county. The court merely affirmed the legal possibility that the trial court could have so found, as it did. Glusman et al. v. The Board of Trustees of the University of North Carolina, 190 S.E. 2d 213 (1972); decision for respondent reversed 93 Ct. 2999 (1973). In an action by a law. student to recover the nonresident tuitin n differential he had,paid for two prior enrolled years the North Carolina Supreme Court sustained as constitutionally. valid a require- ment that,a residentiary durational period of six months be exclusive of enrolled time. On appeal by the petitioner to the United States Supreme Court the prior decision was vacated in a memorandum decision remanding the case to the North*Carolina Supreme Court for further consideration in light of Vlandis v. Kline et al. (Connecticut) 412 U.S. 441 (1973). In Wiandis the United States Supreme Court had held unconstitutional exclusion of en- rolled time as a period with respect to which a residentiary claim could he made and proved. The holdings of Hall and Glusman have been accom- modated into the residentiary classification system by subsequent amendment to the state statutes and the residence manual. NORTH DAKOTA - Jonathon McConaughey Burke and Chris Alan Kinnison v. Kenneth 13aschke, et al., Civ. No. A2-75-102 (1977). The plaintiffs stated in this case that they had been :denied the right, equal to the right accorded a student 21 years and older whose pafents, custo- dial parent or guardian reside outsidethat state, to. establish residency in North Dakota for tuition purposes. The United States' District Court held that the plaintiffs' constitutional right to equal protection of the law has been violated and that they were entitled to a, revirw of their residney status for tuition purposes and,appropiiate relief if it is determined from such review that they were entitled to attend the University of NOrth Dakota with resident classification. OHIO Kaplan v. Kuhn et al., 8 0. N. P. 197, 110 0. D. (N.R.) 321 (1901). The plaintiff was born inigermany and came to the United States at age 12 to reside with his father who was a naturalized citizen. When he was 19 the plaintiff moved to Cincinnati where he attended high school for three years. Later he became self-supporting, reached the age of majority, voted in three city ,elections and contended he did not intend to leave the city. The court ruled that he was 'entitled to free tuition at the University of Cincinnati, a municipal university that enrolled resident students without tuition charges. m4 Halaby v. Board of Directo'tls of the UntUersity Cincinnati, 162 Ohio St. 290, 123 N. E. (2d) 3 (1954). In-another Cincinnati case the court ruled in favor of the plaintiff also. He was a minor alien who resided with his parents who owned property and operated a business in the city. He sought to enter the University of Cincinnati-- as a resident student but was refused this classification. The court held that alien residentwof the city were entitled to the same privileges as other residents and that the student should be granted resident status by virtue of that fact. VERMONT Shotkin V. U.V.M., 133. Vt. 401; 346 A 2d 525 t (1975). The court, in this case, held that "In context of instant case, University of Vermont's definition of domicile was not more restrictive than the corn- - *n^ -_144 - 21 - mon law definitiOn and thus was not inconsistent with...." Vermont Statutes Annotated; Title 16, -Section 2282a. The court held that the University of Vermont's or't year domicile for resident tuition purposes was not in violation of the law. NI WISCONSIN Priest v. Regents of The 41..Iniversy of Wisconsin, 54 Wis. 159, 11 N. W. 472_(1882). 8, This case reaffirmed the right of. the uniyersity to reguthe tuition and fees by stating: "All the acts of the legislature relating to the uniyersity, con- strued together, conclusively establish the power pf the board to exact` fees from the students for admission, instruction, aind the incidental expenses of the university, except asp such power is, from time to time, expressly limited." Walters v. Hoove?'''et al., k civil action pending' A before the U. District Court, Western District of Wisconsin . 0). _i,This suit was. brought by first -year law student at the University of Wisconsin (Madison) attacking the constitutionality of the residency classification statute now applied at the university and .1-sloth method of its administration. This was a class action brought on behalf of eall 'students at 'die university who qualify as'residents for some other purpose. It charged that the sjatute is unpristitu- tional because it "aRties an invidious distinClion between class& of citizens of the state": hinders the right to "travel from one state to another" and .`:`freedom of association"; discriminates on the bems of sex; and is "an arbitrary, irrational, and unreasonable classification that tramples upon the rights,of due process and equal protection of the laws." The plaintiff asked for a three-judge panel to hear the suit and the case was disrftissed. -A. Postsecondary Education Department Through its Department of Postsecondgry Educa- tions the Education Commission of the States has become a major link for postsecondary education among the states and between state officials and professional associations and Various regional 'and interinstitutional consortia. The department con- ducts policy studies and provides consultation to the states on priority issues. An important staff function is assisting the states and their state agencies in providing information for Congres sional actions ielating to postsecondary educa- tion and subsequent implementation by the appropriate federal agenc%s. Publications ECS Annual deport No charge Digeit of Educktion Amendments of 1976 (mimeographed) February 1977 NO charge No. 38Selected Issues Relating to Available Information on Health Education Program Needs May 1973 $3.50 - 1452 2 ; ' e. 39 Model State Legisla4tion Report of the Task Force on Model State Legislation foriApproval of Postsecondary Educational Institutions and Authorization to Grant Degrees, June 1973,, $3.50' No. 43Coordination or Cha9s? Report of the Task Force on Coordination: Governolnce and ° Structure of Postsecondary Edutation October 1973 . . . No. 45Collective Bargaining in Pbstsecondary Educatioaal Institutions Applications'and Alterdatwts29/the Formillat En.ablIng Legislation A e Handbook Marep 1974 $5.00 °.50 ft 0 e No. 47State Tax Support gyiglagji_ Education: Revenue.Apetiaziatitin Trends and Patterns, 1964:.V3 Published wintly with therlentr- for Research and Developmelt.th Higher Education, University o California, Berkeley April 1974 . . . . S4 50 No 53Report of the National Invitational Conference on Consumer Protection. in Postsecondary Education Jirne 1974 .... . . . . . 4S4.00 No 59The States and Graduate.Education Report of the Task Force on Graduate Education February 1975 $4.00 No 64Consumer Protection in Postsecondarx.Education nf Report of the second national co erence, November 1974 March 1975 $4.50 ,r3 Nb 66The Changing Map of Postsecondary Education State Posecondary Education Commissions (1202): Their Origin, Development and Current Status April 1975 ..... . . . . . . s.5o No V6Correctional Education: A Forgotten Human Service January 1976 ...... . . . $3.50 No 78''76 Update: Collective Bargaining in Education A Legislator's Guide' Also includes elementary/secondary information January 1476 $3.50 No 81An Overview of Findings and Recommendations of Major Research Studies and National Commissions CQpcerning Education , of Qffenderl March 1976 . S3.00 No. 49Information Impact: Collision With, Tradition -4 Shifting Levels of Decision Milking in Postsecondary . Education Proceedings of the second National Forum on New Planning and Z Management Systems ' May 1974 $5.00 No. 82The Legal Issues Concerning Education of Offenders March 1976 _$3.00 No. 87Faculty Bargaining, State Government and Campus Autonomy: The Experience in Eight States April 1976 $5.50 No. 94Final Report and. Recommendations: Task Force on State; Institutional and Federal Responsibilitiesin Providing Postsecondary Educational Opportunity to Service Personnel January 1977 No Charge . The Challenge,: , Education of Criminal Offenders A Srnmary of the Correctional Education Project No charge Statewide Planning and Privatelligher ,Education Special report number PA, from the Protect on State Policy and Independent Higher Education November 1976 No. 102Final Report of the Le r Faculty Seminar Series June 1977 $1.50 ilesbonsible Decisions About Alcohol Southeastern Regional Working Conference on the Prevention of Alcohol and Drug/ Abuse: Recommendations July 1974 No charge tr, Western Regional Working Conference'on the Prevention of Alcohol Misuse: Recommendations - October 1974- No charge Interim,Report Number 1 (A Summary) January 1975 Interim Report Numberill Technical . Document) P January 1975 ,. $3.50 , A Interim Report Number 2 (1grthi mary) June 1975- No charge .No,charge Interim Report Number 2 (Technical Document) June 1975 :,-. $3.50 InterimiReport Number 3 (A Surribtary) September 1975' No charge - 146 0 Interim Report Number 3 (Technical" Document) September.] 975 $3150 Interim Report Number 4 (A Summary) .4, September 1976 No charge Final Repoit (A Summary) A folder containing thfee booklets, April 1 977 Final Report (Technical Document) Sepieler 1977 Periodicals .No charge $5.00 COMPACT t The quarterly magazine of ECS directed to the speciarconcerns of education and politics in the states. Coverage includes nationwide issues and Ow implications on a stateby-state basis, a Washington tolumn and bookreviews. $10 per year, prepaYpent required. Directory of Professional Personnel Staff listing for State Higher Education Executive,Offibers (SHE EO) agencies, regional cothpacts and Cinadian counterparts of SHEEO. Updated annually ' Per copy, without binder $2.50" 0 .Higher Education in the States