The Nebraska dream act will live, to be fought over another day.

On Friday, Sen. Charlie Janssen of Fremont announced he would not pursue an amendment to a bill (LB403) that addresses illegal immigration in the state.

The amendment would have repealed the so-called dream act, which allows undocumented students to pay in-state tuition if they graduated from a Nebraska high school after attending that school for three years.

The amendment was scheduled to have a hearing next Thursday before the Judiciary Committee. That hearing was canceled.

Omaha Sen. Brad Ashford said Friday the in-state tuition issue is a different focus from the immigration bill that advanced Wednesday on a 45-2 vote to second reading.

That bill, introduced by Sen. Russ Karpisek of Wilber, and amended by the Judiciary Committee, would prohibit state agencies and political subdivisions from providing public benefits to undocumented workers.

It also would allow the state Department of Labor to take two years to educate the private sector on how to use the federal E-Verify system and then report to the Legislature on its use. It would not mandate E-Verify for private businesses.

“What we’re doing now is pretty big stuff,” Ashford said.

Asking Nebraska businesses to use E-Verify is a significant shift, he said, and it is his hope that its use over time would reduce discrimination.

Janssen said he would introduce a resolution for an interim study on the in-state tuition issue. The Judiciary Committee has been conducting an immigration study, in part with meetings across the state in communities highly affected by illegal immigration.

That study would continue after the Legislature’s regular session in communities such as South Sioux City, Fremont and South Omaha, Ashford said.

The federal government allows that undocumented children can be educated in K-12 schools. How that relates to higher education needs to be investigated, Ashford said.

The committee will also study Omaha Sen. Tom White’s amendment, which also was withdrawn. His amendment would have required every business with 25 or more employees to verify the work status of new hires.

If a business would knowingly employ an undocumented worker, it would be liable to the state and local governing bodies for any funds spent on public benefits given to that worker or family members.

Janssen said he supports LB403, and next year will introduce a bill to repeal the in-state tuition benefit. It will not necessarily be his priority bill, but he will make the issue a priority, he said.

When Janssen brought the amendment Tuesday into the discussion of LB403, it caused a heated shift in the debate. It prompted Speaker Mike Flood to announce that if the amendment would pass, he would move for a public hearing.

Janssen said Friday he believed the amendment would have passed, but decided he would be more comfortable repealing the tuition benefit through a standalone bill. He did not want to blur the issue for senators debating Karpisek’s bill, he said.

It also would have been unfair to put the Judiciary Committee, which already has a heavy workload, through another immigration-related hearing, he said.

He said he was open to discussions about sun-setting the tuition benefit, one of the options in the committee’s immigration report.

“My intention never was to go into the university system or state colleges and pull (out) unlawful residents who have taken advantage of this program,” he said.

Reach JoAnne Young at 473-7228 or jyoung@journalstar.com.