School District Blocks 5 Children of Illegal Immigrants From Classes

The New York Times ^ | September 21, 2002 | MARIA NEWMAN

[OldFriend]

The overcrowding of schools would be alleviated immediately if all the illegal immigrants were sent back to their home countries.

Taxpayer resources could then be spent on teaching LEGAL children. Smaller class size, less need for remediation and special ed, to say nothing of ESL requirements.

Might even take some of the burden off our social security fund and Medicade.........

[sarcasm]

Deportation makes too much sense - our politicians will never go for it.

[OldFriend]

NYC schools are overwhelmed with overpopulation. Mayor Ed Koch demanded that no illegals be reported. Hence we have an overburdened school system where NO ONE is learning.

[ijcr]

U.S. SUPREME COURT

PLYLER v. DOE, 457 U.S. 202 (1982)

457 U.S. 202

PLYLER, SUPERINTENDENT, TYLER INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. v. DOE, GUARDIAN, ET AL. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 80-1538.

Argued December 1, 1981 Decided June 15, 1982 *



BRENNAN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, POWELL, and STEVENS, JJ., joined. MARSHALL, J., post, p. 230, BLACKMUN, J., post, p. 231, and POWELL, J., post, p. 236, filed concurring opinions. BURGER, C. J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which WHITE, REHNQUIST, and O'CONNOR, JJ., joined, post, p. 242.



Held:

A Texas statute which withholds from local school districts any state funds for the education of children who were not "legally admitted" into the United States, and which authorizes local school districts to deny enrollment to such children, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 210-230.


(a) The illegal aliens who are plaintiffs in these cases challenging the statute may claim the benefit of the Equal Protection Clause, which provides that no State shall "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Whatever his status under the immigration laws, an alien is a "person" in any ordinary sense of that term. This Court's prior cases recognizing that illegal aliens are "persons" protected by the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, which Clauses do not include the phrase "within its jurisdiction," cannot be distinguished on the asserted ground that persons who have entered the country illegally are not "within the jurisdiction" of a State even if they are present within its boundaries and subject to its laws. Nor do the logic and history of the Fourteenth Amendment support such a construction. Instead, use of the phrase "within its jurisdiction" confirms the understanding that the Fourteenth Amendment's protection extends to anyone, citizen or stranger, who is subject to the laws of a State, and reaches into every corner of a State's territory. Pp. 210-216.


(b) The discrimination contained in the Texas statute cannot be considered rational unless it furthers some substantial goal of the State. Although undocumented resident aliens cannot be treated as a "suspect class," and although education is not a "fundamental right," so as to require the State to justify the statutory classification by showing that it serves a compelling governmental interest, nevertheless the Texas statute imposes a lifetime hardship on a discrete class of children not accountable for their disabling status. These children can neither affect their parents' conduct nor their own undocumented status. [457 U.S. 202, 203] The deprivation of public education is not like the deprivation of some other governmental benefit. Public education has a pivotal role in maintaining the fabric of our society and in sustaining our political and cultural heritage; the deprivation of education takes an inestimable toll on the social, economic, intellectual, and psychological well-being of the individual, and poses an obstacle to individual achievement. In determining the rationality of the Texas statute, its costs to the Nation and to the innocent children may properly be considered. Pp. 216-224.


(c) The undocumented status of these children vel non does not establish a sufficient rational basis for denying them benefits that the State affords other residents. It is true that when faced with an equal protection challenge respecting a State's differential treatment of aliens, the courts must be attentive to congressional policy concerning aliens. But in the area of special constitutional sensitivity presented by these cases, and in the absence of any contrary indication fairly discernible in the legislative record, no national policy is perceived that might justify the State in denying these children an elementary education. Pp. 224-226.


(d) Texas' statutory classification cannot be sustained as furthering its interest in the "preservation of the state's limited resources for the education of its lawful residents." While the State might have an interest in mitigating potentially harsh economic effects from an influx of illegal immigrants, the Texas statute does not offer an effective method of dealing with the problem. Even assuming that the net impact of illegal aliens on the economy is negative, charging tuition to undocumented children constitutes an ineffectual attempt to stem the tide of illegal immigration, at least when compared with the alternative of prohibiting employment of illegal aliens. Nor is there any merit to the suggestion that undocumented children are appropriately singled out for exclusion because of the special burdens they impose on the State's ability to provide high-quality public education. The record does not show that exclusion of undocumented children is likely to improve the overall quality of education in the State. Neither is there any merit to the claim that undocumented children are appropriately singled out because their unlawful presence within the United States renders them less likely than other children to remain within the State's boundaries and to put their education to productive social or political use within the State. Pp. 227-230.

One vote in the USSC and this would have never happened.

[Black Agnes]

I live just a hop skip and jump away from Fairview. We are neck deep in illegals here. Taxes have gone through the roof to pay for their social services and the 'quality of life' in the neighborhood has gone to heck. They spit on the street, dump garbage and when the men get a hankering for the call of nature, they just take a whiz wherever they want. I can understand homeless doing this, most of the homeless aren't mentally competent. I can understand drunk frat boys doing this, they're young and stupid. I can't understand normal adult males doing this within sight of G-d and everybody in broad open daylight.

[gunshy]

Can't do that, they may vote republican.

[Black Agnes]

In the past 10 years, Bergen county has gone from a pubbie strong hold to a Gore win county in the last election. Maybe if we just pander with taxpayer dollars a *little* more they'll vote pubbie, what say you?

[FITZ]

as their mothers — two sisters and a niece — agonize over how to get them back into school.

Why are the mothers agonizing? Why don't they enroll them in a parochial or private school? It seems what they want is the freebie school where they believe others should pay their way.

[Black Agnes]

ping!

[Black Agnes]

OOp, you posted before I did, sorry.

[FITZ]

They have schools in Canada anyhow --it's not like they'd be denied an education if they get deported back to where they hold citizenship.

[BureaucratusMaximus]

Deportation makes too much sense - our politicians will never go for it.

No, no, no...deportation IS offensive...not to mention insensitive; thats why our politicians will never go for it. We must be compassionate to the members of the global community, we only seek to steal, rape and pillage share in the great wealth and prosperity of the U.S.

[Tancredo Fan]

Thanks for the ping. The question really should be directed to the INS: "Why haven't you removed this swarm of moochers 3 weeks later?" To H&*# with the ACLU.

[Salvation]

A day later, the children — two pairs of siblings and a cousin — were abruptly ordered out of school before lunchtime by the district superintendent, who said he had just discovered their parents were in this country illegally.

Bump. They can be here legally or illegally. The choice of the parents.

[BJungNan]

no matter what their immigrant status

Definitions of immigration seem to very. Funny, I thought it meant filing the appropriate documents and applications, going to the interview and obtaining legal permission to enter this great country.

[Tancredo Fan]

They can be here legally or illegally. The choice of the parents.

They all should have been taken into custody as soon as it was discovered they are in the country illegally. Deport them. The incompetent feds have completely lost all control when illegal aliens can be this brazen and not be dealt with.

[Cacique]

A Must Read by Everyone on the subject of immigration (click on picture)

The Hardcover edition.

[agrace]

That was basically my thought. Are they giving them any home instruction or are they too busy moaning around the house?

[FITZ]

What's amazing is that they originally aren't from Canada but seem to have cared enough about the laws of Canada that they did immigrate legally there and even became citizens of that country. It's this country that seems to be so lax and lacking in respect.

[OldFriend]

Any states' rights here?