This is one of those stories that at first tends to make the blood boil - I mean is this how we treat veterans? But on a second look - it seems like an unwarranted challenge and suit by the vet. The vet claims discrimination, but that is only a hook. [Army Vet Challenges UNC Over Tuition Costs].
The vet here was basically shopping around for the best tuition rates - nothing wrong with that. Out of state residents are charged more than in state. But she expects the university to recognize her subjective intentions merely because she claims state residency.
Thus the issue is residency - pure and simple. Where is the veteran's residence while still in the service?
"For voting purposes, the "legal voting residence" can be the state or territory where the servicemember last resided prior to entering military service or the state or territory that a servicemember has since claimed as the legal residence. To claim a new legal residence, one must have simultaneous physical presence and the intent to return to that location as the primary residence. Military and family members can choose to change their legal residence every time they change permanent duty stations." [Air Force Personnel Center - Air Force Voting].
Now she owns property in the state of her claimed residency - but is property ownership alone enough? Not likely. Most likely it would be if some part of her family was living on the property. We don't know from the story what other objective efforts she made to maintain her claimed residency.
But it seems clear this is not a story about discrimination against veterans.