Frame v. Residency Appeals Committee

George and Lori Frame (the Frames) (plaintiffs) enrolled at Utah State University (Utah State). The students applied for resident status for tuition purposes but were denied by the Residency Appeals Committee (the committee) at Utah State. Utah State charged higher tuition to nonresidents. Beginning in 1971, the Frames had resided in Utah on and off, renting an apartment, registering to vote, and filing tax returns in Utah. The Frames left Utah for a period and then returned to the state in March 1978 to recommence their schooling. After being denied residency status in September 1978, the Frames again applied in April 1979, more than one year after registering at Utah State. Their application was denied again on the ground that they had been absent from Utah for more than 30 days during the summer of 1978. Under rules promulgated by the Utah Board of Regents, an adult seeking residence in the state had to maintain continuous residency for one full year prior to the beginning of the academic period. The rules permitted a 30-day absence during the one-year period. The Frames’ suit challenged the rule precluding residency if an individual spent more than 30 days outside of the state during the one-year period. The Frames made several arguments, including that (1) the 30-day rule violated the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause because the rule created an irrebuttable presumption that they were nonresidents; and (2) the rule violated the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause because it treated them differently without any rational basis. A lower court rejected all of the Frames’ claims. The Frames appealed.