Replies

Now since our laws are based in the Constitution and by the very definition of "illegal", these people are not even supposed to BE here, tell me again how it is a violation of the Constitution to deny them LEGAL drivers' licenses.

Because alien status is a protected class under our consitution and any state distiction based on that status will fail if challeged in court. See Prop 187.

[Because alien status is a protected class under our conistution]

Show us where this is specified. Article and section, please. Also, please learn to spell the word "Constitution" and be sure to capitalize it as a gesture of respect and to show that you are referring to the US Constitution.

"Because alien status is a protected class under our consitution "

Oh, I get it now. That is the same principle as this one:

"You break into my house to rob and rape me. I shoot you. I go to jail and lose my property to pay you off when you get out of the hospital and sue me."

Yeah, that's fair. < /sarcasm >

Because alien status is a protected class under our consitution and any state distiction based on that status will fail if challeged in court. See Prop 187.

Prop #187 was declared unconstitutional by Maria Pfaelzer, a notorious Leftist federal judge. Much, if not all of her specious decision would have been overturned by the US Supreme Court, and Democrat Governor Gray Davis of California knew it.
That's why Davis scuttled the appeal of Proposition #187... he knew he would lose, and wanted to reward his illegal California voters.

Because alien status is a protected class under our consitution and any state distiction based on that status will fail if challeged in court. See Prop 187.

So, states can't even deny an illegal the right to vote? You seem to be saying that a person can (and must) be accorded all the rights and privileges of a state, i.e. citizenship in that state, while at the same time not being a citizen of the United States which would mean that states have taken over the role of naturalization which is clearly given to federal government in the Constitution. The Constitution does not obligate nor permit states to grant de facto citizenship to foreign nationals (in fact it prohibits it).

What the Constitution says and what an activist federal judge says that it says may be entirely different. The Constitution does say is that it pertains "to ourselves and our posterity", meaning legal citizens -- not anybody who happens to break in. Thomas Jefferson said that "The first consideration in immigration should always be the welfare of the receiving country". The founding fathers were not for open borders at all. And they were not immigrants either, as many rant, because they could not have immigrated to a country before it existed.