California has built a pathway into higher education for undocumented students through AB 540 and the California Dream Act. But as the 2026–27 academic year begins, a different question is becoming harder to ignore: Can students who are allowed to attend college also get the work opportunities that can help them afford to stay?
For an undocumented student preparing for college in California this fall, the first question is often financial:
Can I afford to go?
California has spent years building answers.
Qualifying students can receive in-state tuition through AB 540. Eligible students can apply for state financial aid through the California Dream Act Application, or CADAA. Public colleges have also developed programs and resources specifically for undocumented and mixed-status students.
But there is another piece of the college equation that tuition assistance cannot solve:
Can I work while I am in school?
That question is now at the center of Assembly Bill 713, California’s latest attempt to expand campus employment opportunities for undocumented students.
The bill would prohibit the University of California, California State University and California Community Colleges from disqualifying a student from a job because the student cannot provide proof of federal work authorization, except when that proof is required by federal law or by a grant funding the particular position. The current bill text calls for implementation by January 6, 2027.
The timing is significant.
AB 713 has reached the final stretch of the 2026 legislative session, while California lawmakers are also pressing federal officials over delays affecting DACA renewals. The Assembly adopted HR 124 by a 62–0 vote on Aug. 6, urging action concerning the DACA program.
For students, those developments raise a larger question:
What happens when California protects your access to college, but federal immigration rules or campus employment policies make it harder to earn the money you need to stay there?
California’s tuition and financial-aid protections remain in place
The foundation is AB 540, California’s nonresident tuition exemption.
Students who meet the state’s requirements can qualify for resident tuition at California public colleges and universities rather than paying the higher nonresident rate. The California Student Aid Commission’s AB 540 information explains the current eligibility requirements and application process.
The California Dream Act provides another important pathway.
Eligible students can submit the CADAA to seek qualifying California state financial aid. The California Dream Act is separate from DACA, meaning a student’s eligibility for California state aid should not be confused with whether that student has DACA.
That distinction matters.
An undocumented student does not necessarily need DACA to qualify for California’s state financial-aid system.
And AB 713 reaches beyond the DACA population.
The bill is about undocumented students who may be excluded from campus employment because they cannot provide federal work authorization—not simply about people whose DACA renewals are delayed.
California’s system, in other words, has made meaningful progress on getting students into college.
The next fight is about what happens once they get there.
The Latino connection is significant—but the numbers need context
The issue has clear relevance for California’s Latino communities, but the demographic evidence needs to be described accurately.
The American Immigration Council’s research on undocumented college students estimates that 45.7% of undocumented college students nationwide are Hispanic. Among students eligible for DACA, the Hispanic share rises to 68.8%.
The research also shows that undocumented college students are racially and ethnically diverse, including Asian American and Pacific Islander, Black and white students.
That means Parriva should not describe undocumented college students as exclusively Latino.
But it does establish a substantial Latino connection to the issue—particularly among DACA-eligible students.
California is also home to one of the nation’s largest populations of undocumented students in higher education. The Higher Ed Immigration Portal’s California data estimates that more than 80,000 undocumented students were enrolled in California postsecondary institutions in its underlying data.
For California families, the stakes extend beyond a student’s immigration status.
They can affect whether a student can pay rent, buy textbooks, cover transportation and remain enrolled.
That is where campus employment becomes part of the college-access story.
Financial aid does not pay every college bill
Getting resident tuition or state financial aid can make college more accessible.
But it does not necessarily cover everything.
Students still face housing, food, transportation, books, technology, child care and other living expenses.
A campus job can help with those costs while also providing work experience and professional connections.
That is why AB 713 is more consequential than a technical dispute over hiring paperwork.
The bill’s actual language is narrower than some descriptions circulating online.
It would not automatically make every campus job available to every undocumented student.
Instead, it would prevent UC, CSU and California Community Colleges from disqualifying a student solely because the student cannot provide proof of federal work authorization, with exceptions when federal law requires that proof or when it is a condition of a grant funding the specific position.
The bill also instructs those institutions to treat the federal prohibition on hiring undocumented workers as inapplicable on the theory that the provision does not apply to branches of state government. That is the central legal question surrounding the legislation.
And there is an important caveat for UC.
The bill says its provisions would apply to the University of California unless the law is found inapplicable; in that circumstance, the provisions would apply to UC only if the Regents adopt a resolution making them applicable.
So even if AB 713 becomes law, students should not assume that every campus job will immediately become available.
DACA delays make the employment question more urgent
DACA recipients face a related but distinct problem.
DACA provides deferred action and, for eligible recipients, employment authorization.
USCIS DACA renewal guidance currently says USCIS aims to process DACA renewal requests within 120 days and advises recipients to submit renewals 120 to 150 days before their current DACA expires. USCIS also provides a process for applicants whose renewals have been pending for more than 105 days.
That does not mean every DACA renewal takes four months, and it does not establish a universal six-month processing time.
But it does create a real vulnerability for people whose employment depends on an unbroken authorization period.
Parriva previously reported on months-long DACA renewal delays and their impact on work permits in California, including the consequences for people whose employment was disrupted while waiting for renewals.
Now California lawmakers are pressing federal officials over the same broader problem.
HR 124, introduced by Assemblymember José Luis Solache, was adopted by the Assembly 62–0 on Aug. 6. The measure addresses the DACA program and calls for action on renewal delays.
That produces two different policy fights.
Washington controls DACA and federal employment authorization.
California controls many of the policies governing its public colleges.
AB 713 is an attempt to use the second area of authority to address an employment barrier that California lawmakers cannot solve through DACA itself.
AB 713 is also a sequel to a Newsom veto
This is not California’s first attempt to change campus employment rules.
Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed AB 2586 in 2024, a predecessor to the current legislation.
In his official veto message, Newsom raised concerns about the legal consequences of allowing the policy to move forward before courts resolved the underlying federal-law question.
The governor specifically cited potential civil and criminal liability for state employees and argued that the novel legal theory behind the legislation should first be tested in court.
That history matters because AB 713 puts Newsom in a familiar position.
If lawmakers pass the bill, the governor could once again be asked to decide whether California should move forward with a state-level solution despite unresolved federal legal questions.
The issue is no longer simply whether undocumented students should have opportunities.
It is whether California’s public colleges can legally provide those opportunities under the state’s interpretation of federal law.
The legal landscape has changed since 2024
There has been an important development since Newsom vetoed AB 2586.
The California Supreme Court allowed an appellate ruling involving UC’s campus-employment policy to stand after declining review. The underlying case, Muñoz v. Regents of the University of California, involved whether UC’s exclusion of undocumented students from certain educational employment violated California law. California Senate Judiciary Committee analysis of AB 713
That development strengthened the argument that UC’s employment policy could not simply exclude students based on immigration status without considering California’s anti-discrimination protections.
But it did not resolve every federal question surrounding employment authorization.
That distinction is important.
AB 713 is still built around a contested interpretation of federal law.
Supporters argue that the federal employment prohibition does not apply to state government entities in the way opponents contend.
Universities and critics have raised concerns about federal consequences, institutional liability and potential effects on federal funding.
So students should understand what AB 713 is—and what it is not.
It is a proposed state solution to a legal problem that has not been completely settled.
AB 713 is now a live Sacramento fight
The legislation’s timing gives the issue immediate news value.
AB 713 advanced from the Senate Appropriations Committee on Aug. 13 in a 5–2 vote, according to the Daily Bruin’s report on the committee action.
The next major question is whether the full Senate will pass it before the Aug. 31 deadline.
If lawmakers pass it, the legislation would go to Newsom.
That creates a political question that California’s 2024 experience makes especially interesting:
Will Newsom sign a revised version of a bill he previously vetoed?
The answer cannot be assumed.
The legislation’s legal structure has changed, the surrounding court landscape has changed and the bill’s implementation date has changed.
But the fundamental dispute remains:
Can California public colleges create campus employment opportunities for undocumented students without violating federal law?
What students need to know right now
For students entering the 2026–27 school year, there is an important distinction between protections that already exist and changes lawmakers are still considering.
1. Check AB 540 eligibility
If you believe you qualify for California’s nonresident tuition exemption, check the current requirements through the California Student Aid Commission rather than assuming your immigration status determines eligibility by itself.
2. Do not overlook the California Dream Act
Eligible undocumented students can use the CADAA to seek qualifying California financial aid.
For community-college students, the state’s current deadline for the 2026–27 application is September 2, 2026. California Student Aid Commission financial-aid application information
Students should also check their individual college’s financial-aid requirements and deadlines.
3. If you have DACA, watch your renewal timeline
USCIS recommends filing renewals well before the current authorization expires.
Students whose renewal has been pending beyond the agency’s stated inquiry threshold should use USCIS’s official case-inquiry process rather than relying on social-media reports about processing times. USCIS DACA information
For additional California-specific context, Parriva’s earlier DACA renewal reporting explains how prolonged processing can affect employment.
4. Do not assume AB 713 is already law
It isn’t.
Even if the Legislature passes the measure, the current bill text sets January 6, 2027 as its implementation date.
Students should therefore check the employment rules at their individual campus during the fall semester rather than assuming AB 713 already guarantees access to campus jobs.
Los Angeles students should use campus resources
For students in Los Angeles, the best first step when immigration status intersects with financial aid, employment or academic planning is often the campus’s dedicated undocumented-student support program.
UCLA, Cal State LA, Cal State Fullerton and Los Angeles-area community colleges have developed resources for undocumented and mixed-status students.
Students should also seek qualified legal assistance for individualized immigration questions rather than relying on general information online.
That is especially important when a DACA renewal, employment authorization expiration or other immigration matter could affect a student’s ability to work.
For immigrant students weighing college options and career planning more broadly, Parriva’s guide to changing college options for immigrant students provides additional context.
The bigger issue: College access is not the same as opportunity
California has spent years building the first part of the equation.
AB 540 can make resident tuition available to qualifying students.
The California Dream Act can open access to state financial aid.
Campus support programs can help students navigate college.
But getting through the admissions and financial-aid doors is only the beginning.
A student also needs to be able to stay enrolled, gain experience and prepare for a career.
That is why AB 713 matters.
The debate is ultimately about a simple question:
If California says an undocumented student belongs in its public college classroom, should that student also be able to compete for campus employment unless federal law specifically says otherwise?
Supporters say yes.
Critics and university officials have raised questions about federal law, institutional liability and the consequences of challenging federal employment restrictions.
Those questions remain unresolved.
But the Legislature is forcing the issue back into the spotlight at exactly the moment when many students are preparing to start another academic year.
What happens next?
AB 713 faces its next major test in the California Senate.
If lawmakers pass it, the legislation would go to Newsom, reviving a policy debate the governor confronted when he vetoed AB 2586 two years ago.
The current bill would take effect Jan. 6, 2027, subject to its legal and institutional provisions.
For students, however, the immediate lesson is simpler.
College access and work access are two different fights.
California has spent years building the first.
In 2026, Sacramento is deciding whether it is ready to fight for the second.
This article provides general information and is not individualized legal advice. Immigration and employment questions can depend on a student’s circumstances. Students with questions about DACA, employment authorization or other immigration matters should consult a licensed immigration attorney or DOJ-accredited representative.
