PHOENIX — The Trump administration is suing the Arizona Board of Regents for allowing certain people living in the country illegally, known as “Dreamers,” to pay the same tuition as all other Arizona residents.

In legal papers filed in federal court, the Department of Justice says the policy, approved by Arizona voters in 2022, violates a 1998 federal law.

It also runs afoul of a sweeping executive order issued last year by President Donald Trump directing the agency to take action against any state that gives benefits to people living in the country illegally that are not available to all American citizens. That, the order says, includes “state laws that provide in-state higher education tuition to aliens but not to out-of-state American citizens.”

Similar lawsuits have been filed against more than a dozen other states, according to Assistant Attorney General Garrett Greene, who signed the new lawsuit. He said judges in five states have voided those policies.

Proposition 308, the 2022 ballot measure, allows certain Arizona high school graduates who meet other conditions to pay the same tuition available to state residents, regardless of immigration status. At the same time, U.S. citizens from another state can be required to pay the higher non-resident tuition.

In fact, one provision in that voter-approved law specifically says that “persons without lawful immigration status are eligible for in-state tuition.”

Attorney General Kris Mayes, anticipating such a lawsuit, issued a legal opinion last year contending that the wording of the 2022 ballot measure is sufficiently different from what federal law forbids.

That opinion states that in-state tuition eligibility is not based on Arizona residency. Instead, to qualify, someone needed to have attended an Arizona high school “while physically present in this state for at least two years” and having obtained a diploma in Arizona.

That, Mayes said, means residency does not trigger eligibility. Therefore, it does not run afoul of the federal law that prohibits states from offering in-state tuition to their Arizona residents, regardless of legal status, while denying the same benefit to U.S. residents from elsewhere.

“Although many people who meet the eligibility requirements will also be residents, not all will be,” she said.

“For example, a student could meet the statute’s attendance and graduation requirement, move to another state, and then plan to return to Arizona for college,” Mayes wrote in her legal opinion. “That student would not be a current Arizona resident, but would be eligible for in-state tuition.”

She also said the law allows in-state tuition for someone who crosses into Arizona every day from another state to attend school here despite being a legal resident of that other state.

Conversely, she said, some Arizona residents will not be eligible for in-state tuition because they did not attend high school for the two years required by the law and did not graduate from high school here.

Justice Department lawyers, however, say the result is the same: Arizona residents in this country without legal status pay a tuition rate lower than U.S. citizens who are residents of other states.

The new lawsuit also asks a federal judge to overturn Prop. 308 as violating the supremacy of federal laws on immigration. And, according to federal attorneys, that would also override policies at Maricopa and Pima community colleges that mirror those of the universities.

The issue of tuition for those who are not citizens traces its roots back to the Obama administration, which created the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program in 2012. It allows people who arrived in this country illegally as children before 2007 — colloquially called “Dreamers” — to remain and even to work if they meet certain conditions.

Based on that, the Maricopa Community College system and, later, the Arizona Board of Regents agreed to let DACA recipients pay in-state tuition. But the Arizona Supreme Court ruled in 2018 that is precluded by Proposition 300, a 2006 ballot measure that denies various public benefits to those not in the country legally — including any form of subsidized tuition.

Prop. 308, approved by a margin of 51.2% to 48.8%, was crafted to create an exception.

In a prepared statement, Mayes took a swat at the administration for filing suit, not just here but against other states.

“This case is nothing more than a political vendetta aimed at undermining the will of Arizona voters and harming kids who have done nothing wrong,” she said.

Regents spokeswoman Megan Gilbertson said the board is carrying out the law enacted by the state and approved by the voters.

“We are reviewing the lawsuit and will work closely with Arizona leaders on the appropriate next steps,” she said.

A spokesman for Pima Community College said the school had no comment. The Maricopa colleges did not respond immediately.