Normally, it would be a violation of the dormant commerce clause in the form of economic protectionism to charge out of state students more than in state students, but the Supreme Court has ruled that state governments (public universities are state actors because of the source of their funding) have a compelling interest in ensuring that the recipients of that funding contribute to the state where they received it. Basically, they want to discourage people from moving to a state for college and then taking their tax funded education elsewhere. I don’t really agree with that reasoning, but that’s the reason.
Latest Answers