Text Drivers are Killers
Joe Biden - "Time to put Trump in the bullseye."
Courts are not allowed to write laws, you ignorant jackass. Only congress can do that and in section 1324 title 8 they say illegals cannot attend our schools.
NYC fires teachers for refusing covid vax. Unvaxxed ILLEGAL kids attend the schools
- Thread starter Text Drivers are Killers
- Start date
Courts are not allowed to write laws, you ignorant jackass. Only congress can do that and in section 1324 title 8 they say illegals cannot attend our schools.
floridafan
Verified User
Section 1324 Title 8 has nothing to do with undocumented children, you ignorant cunt.
Monad Portal
Was it me?
just stop it.
Stop what? Asking questions you don't know the answers to? Why? Because it makes you look stupid? When has that ever been a valid excuse for anything?
Monad Portal
Was it me?
being a fucking idiot.
By asking questions you can't answer?
Wouldn't that make YOU the idiot, since you can't answer these questions?
Monad Portal
Was it me?
some questions are stupid as fuck. like you.
True...but these questions aren't because they are forcing you to be accountable for the shit that pours from your big, fat, stupid mouth.
Text Drivers are Killers
Joe Biden - "Time to put Trump in the bullseye."
HAHAHA. Hear that everybody? This moron says letting illegal kids use our schools does NOT encourage them and their parents to live here!!!!
YOU ARE THE STUPIDEST PERSON OF ALL TIME
floridafan
Verified User
Did I say that sweet pea, no I said you are a fucking liar.
[h=2]Plyler v. Doe[/h]Summary of a Fourteenth Amendment Landmark case:
Plyler v. Doe 457 U.S. 202 (1982)(link is external)
[h=3]Facts[/h]In 1975, the Texas Legislature revised its education laws to deny enrollment in their public schools to and withhold any state funds for the education of children who were not "legally admitted" to the country.
A class action was filed on behalf of certain school-age children of Mexican origin residing in Texas who could not establish that they had been legally admitted into the United States. The class filed a motion for permanent injunctive relief, asking the district court to prevent defendants from denying a free public education to members of the class.
In deciding the motion, the district court found that neither the revised law nor its implementation had "either the purpose or effect of keeping illegal aliens out of the State of Texas." The district court also found that the increase in enrollment in Texas public schools was primarily attributable to the admission of children who were legal residents. Finally, the district court found that while barring undocumented children would save money, it would not necessarily improve the quality of the education. The court then concluded that illegal aliens were entitled to the protection of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and that the Texas legislation violated it.
The Court of Appeals affirmed, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
[h=3]Issue[/h]Whether denying undocumented children of illegal immigrants the right to attend public school constitutes discrimination based on alienage that violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
[h=3]Ruling[/h]Yes.
[h=3]Reasoning[/h](Brennan, J.) By a 5–4 vote, the Court concluded that the Texas legislation violated the Equal Protection Clause. The Court explained that "education has a fundamental role in maintaining the fabric of our society" and "provides the basic tools by which individuals might lead economically productive lives to the benefit of us all." Further, while persuasive arguments support the view that a state may withhold benefits from people whose presence within the country is a result of unlawful conduct, the children of such illegal entrants "can affect neither their parents' conduct nor their own status," and "legislation directing the onus of a parent's misconduct against his children does not comport with fundamental conceptions of justice."
While the state has a legitimate interest in protecting itself from an influx of illegal immigrants, there was no evidence to suggest that any immigrants came to the country to avail themselves of a free education. Similarly, while the state has an interest in removing burdens on the state's ability to provide high-quality public education, there was no evidence that the exclusion of undocumented children was likely to improve the overall quality of education in Texas.
Accordingly, the majority affirmed the lower court's ruling.
Plyler v. Doe 457 U.S. 202 (1982)(link is external)
[h=3]Facts[/h]In 1975, the Texas Legislature revised its education laws to deny enrollment in their public schools to and withhold any state funds for the education of children who were not "legally admitted" to the country.
A class action was filed on behalf of certain school-age children of Mexican origin residing in Texas who could not establish that they had been legally admitted into the United States. The class filed a motion for permanent injunctive relief, asking the district court to prevent defendants from denying a free public education to members of the class.
In deciding the motion, the district court found that neither the revised law nor its implementation had "either the purpose or effect of keeping illegal aliens out of the State of Texas." The district court also found that the increase in enrollment in Texas public schools was primarily attributable to the admission of children who were legal residents. Finally, the district court found that while barring undocumented children would save money, it would not necessarily improve the quality of the education. The court then concluded that illegal aliens were entitled to the protection of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and that the Texas legislation violated it.
The Court of Appeals affirmed, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
[h=3]Issue[/h]Whether denying undocumented children of illegal immigrants the right to attend public school constitutes discrimination based on alienage that violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
[h=3]Ruling[/h]Yes.
[h=3]Reasoning[/h](Brennan, J.) By a 5–4 vote, the Court concluded that the Texas legislation violated the Equal Protection Clause. The Court explained that "education has a fundamental role in maintaining the fabric of our society" and "provides the basic tools by which individuals might lead economically productive lives to the benefit of us all." Further, while persuasive arguments support the view that a state may withhold benefits from people whose presence within the country is a result of unlawful conduct, the children of such illegal entrants "can affect neither their parents' conduct nor their own status," and "legislation directing the onus of a parent's misconduct against his children does not comport with fundamental conceptions of justice."
While the state has a legitimate interest in protecting itself from an influx of illegal immigrants, there was no evidence to suggest that any immigrants came to the country to avail themselves of a free education. Similarly, while the state has an interest in removing burdens on the state's ability to provide high-quality public education, there was no evidence that the exclusion of undocumented children was likely to improve the overall quality of education in Texas.
Accordingly, the majority affirmed the lower court's ruling.
Into the Night
Verified User
The Constitution is not bullshit.
floridafan
Verified User
Where in the Constitution, idiot?
Into the Night
Verified User
floridafan
Verified User
"Flash" has already posted the SC decision. of course you know "Flash".
Into the Night
Verified User
Contextomy fallacy.
Into the Night
Verified User
Contextomy fallacy.
Into the Night
Verified User
Contextomy fallacy.
Into the Night
Verified User
Yes you did. Don't try to deny your own posts, moron. ANYONE can go look it up for themselves!