Thread: Can schools defy immigration laws?

No child is entitled to a free public education in the United States under the 14th Amendment..

Originally Posted by Judy

No child is entitled to a free public education in the United States under the 14th Amendment..

My comment was referring to the Equal Protection Clause under the Fourteenth Amendment, not education. That's what the U.S. Supreme Court used in their ruling to justify their position.

Originally Posted by MW

My comment was referring to the Equal Protection Clause under the Fourteenth Amendment, not education. That's what the U.S. Supreme Court used in their ruling to justify their position.

Neither Plyler vs Doe nor the 14th Amendment empower schools to defy US immigration law. No state, person or school has any power or authority to defy immigration law, not at school, not at a hospital, not at the welfare office, not at a court house, not at a funeral, not at a wedding, not at a church, not anywhere within the boundaries of the United States.

The authority of the federal government is whole and complete under the US Constitution with the plain and simple power to prohibit immigration and the importation of labor into the United States by any means it chooses at any time and location it deems suitable to that purpose. No state, school, church, mayor, police chief, sheriff, welfare clerk, judge, pastor, doctor or anyone else can defy US immigration law in the United States under federal law or the US Constitution.

Therefore, the federal government or states on behalf of the federal government can remove illegal aliens wherever they may be, subject only to a hearing to ensure against mistaken identity so we don't remove US citizens and legal immigrants by mistake. It's that simple.

The essence of Plyler vs Doe was just as simple. The court said, if you allow illegal aliens to remain in your school district, and they show up at an elementary school, you can not charge them tuition to attend because you aren't charging anyone else. The decision was a silly decision, but at the same time, the school district shouldn't have tried to profit from illegal immigration, it should have removed the illegal alien children and their parents from the community or asked the federal government to do so. The court was basing its narrow 5/4 decision on the simple premise that you can't have your cake and eat it, too. It's message was deport and remove or treat them the same as everyone else until you do.

Originally Posted by Judy

Neither Plyler vs Doe nor the 14th Amendment empower schools to defy US immigration law. No state, person or school has any power or authority to defy immigration law, not at school, not at a hospital, not at the welfare office, not at a court house, not at a funeral, not at a wedding, not at a church, not anywhere within the boundaries of the United States.

The authority of the federal government is whole and complete under the US Constitution with the plain and simple power to prohibit immigration and the importation of labor into the United States by any means it chooses at any time and location it deems suitable to that purpose. No state, school, church, mayor, police chief, sheriff, welfare clerk, judge, pastor, doctor or anyone else can defy US immigration law in the United States under federal law or the US Constitution.

Therefore, the federal government or states on behalf of the federal government can remove illegal aliens wherever they may be, subject only to a hearing to ensure against mistaken identity so we don't remove US citizens and legal immigrants by mistake. It's that simple.

The essence of Plyler vs Doe was just as simple. The court said, if you allow illegal aliens to remain in your school district, and they show up at an elementary school, you can not charge them tuition to attend because you aren't charging anyone else. The decision was a silly decision, but at the same time, the school district shouldn't have tried to profit from illegal immigration, it should have removed the illegal alien children and their parents from the community or asked the federal government to do so. The court was basing its narrow 5/4 decision on the simple premise that you can't have your cake and eat it, too. It's message was deport and remove or treat them the same as everyone else until you do.

Geez, you're just not listening. I'm done.

LOL!! It was time for you to listen, not the other way around.