[major-pelham]

The case is Plyler v. Doe
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/457/202/#opinion

It was not a 9-0 decision. but rather 5-4. I just read it. Its holding was that if you have illegal kids in your jurisdiction you have to allow them to partake of public education pare passu as an equal protection of the laws matter. You can’t bar them, you can’t charge fees applicable only to them, they get to go to school like everybody else. Thats what it says and that is ALL it says.

I’m a long lapsed lawyer, but claiming that this footnote, is the basis for anchor babies as ipso facto citizens and all that follows along behind that is beyond ridiculous. The law is far from well settled, in fact it reads to me mostly against the pro-immigration crowds leaning. The opinions nowhere say that anchor babies are citizens. NOWHERE. To think of the trillions spent over this matter and to think that Brennan said the states have no legitimate right to stop that spending is judicial activism run amok. Pretend fundamental rights arising out of obscure 14th amendment cases will end in the moral and fiscal bankruptcy of the United States.

[11th Commandment]

Excellent post Counsellor. Just a note the BOR got the year wrong and said it was a 1985 decision. Coulter also has written on Plyler v. Doe

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3326292/posts

[nikos1121]

So, IOWs O’Reilly, as usual was full of crapola!

Someone, today needs to call him out on it.

He’s an idiot.

[itsahoot]

You can’t bar them, you can’t charge fees applicable only to them, they get to go to school like everybody else.

I seem to remember that this was about kids that walked across the border daily to attend school, they were not residents of the cities schools they attended.