I don't think the matter of PROVIDING an education is at issue. It's whether a state can discriminate based on one's immigration status that is at issue. Clearly, a state may not. See article 1 section 8.
Ive read it before and read it again. Dont see what youre pointing to.
If your an illegal you don't have an immigration status .....your a criminal.
But thanks for playing ......
LOL, you must mean Article I, Section 8 of the Mexican Constitution, because that section of the U.S. Constitution only specifies the powers of Congress (e.g., rules on naturalization, in relevant example) and says nothing whatsoever about what states may or may not do in regards to criminal aliens!
(Is it just my perception, or have the educational eligibility requirements for CAL's fallen dramatically again?)
--Boot Hill
It seems to me, that you would give the whole D*MN country to Mexico, if you had your way! How can you discriminate against a person that doesn't even have the right to be in this country?!
Or maybe this issue is hitting a little closer to home than you would care to admit?
hmmmmmmm?
Nice try, BUT---
A 1996 federal law addressing illegal immigration included a provision affecting state residency requirements for in-state tuition rates, traditionally a matter of state law. Now, states are prohibited from offering in-state tuition rates to unauthorized immigrant students unless other U.S. citizens are eligible for the same rate. Since 2001, more than 20 states have introduced bills addressing in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants. Seven states have established new residency standards allowing unauthorized immigrant students to receive in-state tuition under certain conditions. Students without legal immigrant status continue to be ineligible for federal financial aid, although states are required to provide K-12 public education as a result of a 1982 Supreme Court decision.