Don't dock the undocumented

As tears fell in Page Auditorium on Monday, Jose Antonio Vargas discussed his upbringing as an undocumented immigrant in California. Today, Duke and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill should address undocumented immigrants at home.

The path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants is currently mired in complexity, and we believe that addressing this issue should be a national priority. A path to citizenship, however, will take some time. In the interim, we offer some local suggestions.

In the admissions process, Duke should treat undocumented immigrants as domestic applicants so that their applications are assessed need-blind. Notre Dame has recently decided to admit undocumented immigrants and meet all of their demonstrated need. Notre Dame’s policy treats undocumented immigrants as domestic students, and we believe Duke should follow Notre Dame’s lead for three reasons.

First, we feel that equal access to education should be one of Duke’s primary goals. Undocumented immigrants can apply to Duke, but because of financial restrictions, many are not able to attend. For undocumented students and international students, Duke is "need aware" rather than "need blind," which can create financial barriers for undocumented students, some of whom may have been raised in the states their entire lives. Duke can remove this barrier by treating undocumented students as domestic applicants.

Second, the financial impact of this change would likely be minimal. The application rate for international applicants and undocumented immigrants is approximately 3.5 percent, and it is likely that the vast majority of those applicants are international students. If Duke were to accept undocumented students need-blind, current students would be subsidizing the marginal extra cost of their admission, which we believe would be extremely small.

Third, many college-bound undocumented immigrants were brought to America by their parents at a young age. They did not actively break the law and should not be punished in the admissions process.

Ten miles down the road, students at UNC are on a mission to provide in-state tuition to undocumented students through their “One State, One Rate” campaign. We support this plan, which would increase undocumented students' financial access to higher education.

North Carolina is already investing money in undocumented students’ future by funding K-12 education, and they should continue this trend into college.

Furthermore, because UNC requires that 82 percent of its students are North Carolinians, admitting undocumented students in place of legal North Carolina residents should not cost the state any additional money.

The primary objection to both the Duke and UNC plans is that both solutions are palliative measures and do not address the legislative barriers to citizenship. Congress addressed the issue in 2006, however, and again this year with little success. We feel that these intermediary solutions, though temporary, are necessary to provide education for undocumented immigrants.

A second objection is that Duke and UNC would be colluding in violating the law because they are assisting people who are residing in America illegally. Like most other colleges, however, both Duke and UNC already accept undocumented immigrants. It is therefore fair and prudent for Duke and UNC to work toward making tuition financially feasible for undocumented students who are admitted.

Duke and UNC should choose not to dock the undocumented for simply demanding an education.