Last Wednesday, a panel hosted by student initiative Freedom at Emory, an organization founded in response to Emory’s current policy regarding undocumented students, brought together both documented and undocumented students in a discussion of current policies limiting the latter’s right to a higher education.
Freedom at Emory, which formed this year, is an offshoot of the Atlanta-based organization Freedom University which advocates for the right of undocumented students to a higher education.
We applaud the courage of those students who shared personal accounts of growing up without the legal status of being U.S. citizens. This dialogue broadens the perspectives of those who attend Emory as documented citizens to the struggle that some face. According to the National Immigration Law Center, only about five to 10 percent of undocumented high school graduates continue to college, as compared to about 75 percent of their documented classmates.
Many of the 1.4 million college-age immigrants living in this country did not actively choose to come here. These students cannot be blamed for refusing to take the appropriate measures toward becoming naturalized citizens either, since many have gone through the process and still been unable to attain citizenship, a symbol of the inadequacies of the U.S. immigration system.
Immigration policies in the United States send a clear message to potential immigrants worldwide: although this nation was founded by immigrants and its economic grandeur fueled by immigrants, the U.S. government no longer wants any immigrants. Were it left entirely up to some, we would likely shut our borders altogether and practice migratory isolationism.
Emory admits undocumented students to its colleges; however, undocumented students are not eligible for in-state or federally-reduced tuition. Instead, the University’s financial aid system considers all undocumented students as international students, increasing the price of Emory tuition by an extreme amount.
This has important implications for undocumented students in Georgia. According to the Georgia Board of Regents’ policy 4.1.6, undocumented students are barred from applying to the top five public universities in Georgia, even if they meet Georgia’s residency requirements.
The implication alone behind this stipulation is abhorrent. The Board of Regents not only refuses to acknowledge the rights of undocumented students, some who are American in every sense other than their legal status, but the Board also refuses these students the right to attend the so-called best universities in Georgia. If undocumented students in Georgia cannot attend its best universities, Emory, a private university, should create opportunities for undocumented students to achieve the best education.
Freedom at Emory references Emory’s Equal Opportunity Policy which, similarly to the Board of Regents’ anti-discrimination policy, provides equal opportunity in terms of admission, educational programs and employment “to all individuals regardless of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, gender, genetic information, age, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and veteran’s status.” Emory does not factor a student’s documentation status in its equal opportunity measure, but in order to truly be a University that values diversity and to ethically lessen burdens faced by undocumented students, the University should include documentation status in its affirmative action measures.
In its University Vision Statement, Emory envisions itself as “ethically engaged” and “diverse.” In order to work toward these goals, the University should decrease its barrier imposed against undocumented students, which undermines Emory’s commitment to ethnic, racial and socioeconomic diversity and engaged ethics.
Additionally, as other editorials and letters to the editor have stated, the University should provide both need-based and merit-based scholarships. Emory already allows undocumented students to apply for merit-based scholarships, but these scholarships are often not enough for students who cannot accept them if limited by financial hardships.
We urge the University to actively – and ethically – engage with this issue, acknowledging the need for undocumented students to have access to all kinds of education. If some federal or state regulations impede these recommendations, the University should explicitly state so, creating online resources for undocumented students to understand exactly what kind of financial aid they are able to receive.
What is legal is not always what is ethical. As an institution with high ethical standards, Emory has an obligation to address this crisis of millions of students without access to higher education. What kind of policy is it to bar certain students from achieving the best education that they deserve, a policy that echoes historical discrimination and racism in this country?
While it is unlikely we can expect an overhaul of the state law prohibiting in-state tuition for undocumented residents, as a private institution, Emory can join the movement of schools that are differentiating themselves from long-standing exclusion of undocumented students. Universities like Harvard, Dartmouth, Princeton and Yale have included need-blind admissions and met full demonstrated need for international and U.S. students. Yesterday, New York University announced that it would offer scholarships to undocumented students who have lived in New York for three years.
Let Emory lead by an additional ethical example.
The above staff editorial represents the majority opinion of the Wheel‘s editorial board.
The Emory Wheel was founded in 1919 and is currently the only independent, student-run newspaper of Emory University. The Wheel publishes weekly on Wednesdays during the academic year, except during University holidays and scheduled publication intermissions.
The Wheel is financially and editorially independent from the University. All of its content is generated by the Wheel’s more than 100 student staff members and contributing writers, and its printing costs are covered by profits from self-generated advertising sales.
So would you support funding undocumented students with full demonstrated need at the expense of faculty raises, academic programs, etc.? Need based aid for international students is not currently needed because they are all wealthy. (and thus offered admission) There are only a handful of private universities that can do what you suggest, and you have named them-a few Ivies and maybe Stanford.
While I admire the gusto of the Editorial Board’s challenges to Emory to engage in this and many other issues lately, I find the suggested proposal flawed. Emory University’s endowment is about $6B, while Harvard’s is $36B, Dartmouth College’s $3.7B, Princeton’s $18B, Yale’s $24B. This article compares apples to oranges in terms of Emory’s relationship to the financial behemoths like these schools’ endowments. There is no easy way to simply make money appear, although recently Emory’s Investment Management group has been doing a good job. The article makes poor recommendations for how Emory “should create opportunities for undocumented students to achieve the best education.” The policy that is mentioned is one that I am sure Emory administrators would prefer to take up, but what the article argues for is financially unrealistic. As mentioned, undocumented students cannot pay taxes and therefore do not contribute to the tax base. Emory, being a private institution, does not offer an in-state tuition rate (having graduated from a Georgia high school myself, I can tell you that the Zell Miller Scholarship, part of the Hope Scholarship program, is merit based and is under the purview of the State of Georgia, again out of the control of Emory). That fact withstanding, the argument essentially looks like an argument to offer undocumented students cheaper tuition rates, which could be interpreted as, in effect, proposing discrimination against documented students. The claim that Emory has “its barrier imposed against undocumented students” is frankly untrue. Need-based financial aid often requires completion of the FAFSA, which requires a social security number. The accusations that Emory is imposing barriers against these undocumented students is ill-founded and should be directed at the State and Federal Government. That is not to say that the University could not do more to address this issue in ways under its control, but with regards to financial aid policy, the article’s arguments are not very accurate or strong.
Emory can only support the illegal (undocumented) students at the expense of other
students. The tuition raises will cover the expenses of an illegal immigrant
student. Money is not created out of thin air. We must be rational and
not sentimental. I understand the need for having a diverse community,
but let’s not punish by raises tuition in the name of diversity. I’m
sure you know the tuition raise of $2,000 from last year. I do not know
if you do support or oppose it, but an extra $2,000 from my pocket is a
bit too much. While I admire your call for this need of having a diverse
campus, let’s not forget that there wouldn’t be a campus without people
paying into the system. The cost of an illegal immigrant student receiving
financial aid will call for all the international students applying for
need based financial aid (including me) and I do not know how Emory will
sustain all of these international students and still be able to
balance a budget without tuition hikes.
If you want to lead by an ethical example, please pay the tuition for an illegal immigrant (compared to me as a legal one) and set an ethical example. Please ask your peers as well for raising money for an illegal immigrant.