Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-15-2019, 01:59 PM
 
9,254 posts, read 3,587,882 times
Reputation: 4852

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
They are an unique burden because they arrive illegally and uncontrolled.

That interpretation of the 14th amendment is not set in stone and agreed to by everyone. It was a 5-4 decision so there's plenty of disagreement and it's not unanimously agreed. It could and should be reversed.
Actually, every single judge agreed with one interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which is to say that it applies to everyone within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. So, yes, it was agreed upon by everyone. As I noted earlier, even the dissent stated " "I have no quarrel with the conclusion that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies to aliens who, after their illegal entry into this country, are indeed physically 'within the jurisdiction' of a state."

Arriving illegally, alone, is not a justification to deprive someone of a Constitutional right no matter how much you might wish the converse was true. The application of the Fourteenth Amendment is based on "jurisdiction" and not immigration or citizenship status.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-15-2019, 02:19 PM
 
19,966 posts, read 7,876,419 times
Reputation: 6556
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEPLimey View Post
Actually, every single judge agreed with one interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which is to say that it applies to everyone within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. So, yes, it was agreed upon by everyone. As I noted earlier, even the dissent stated " "I have no quarrel with the conclusion that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies to aliens who, after their illegal entry into this country, are indeed physically 'within the jurisdiction' of a state."

Arriving illegally, alone, is not a justification to deprive someone of a Constitutional right no matter how much you might wish the converse was true. The application of the Fourteenth Amendment is based on "jurisdiction" and not immigration or citizenship status.
I doubt that's true all justice agreed on the equal protection clause requires identical treatment of different categories of persons.
https://www.thesocialcontract.com/ar...ler-v-doe.html

Quote:
Chief Justice Warren Burger supported the state's position in his dissenting opinion:
"The Equal Protection Clause does not mandate identical treatment of different categories of persons...
A free public education is not in the Constitution and a constitutional right. You are essentially arguing that illegals should have all the same rights as citizens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2019, 03:23 PM
 
9,254 posts, read 3,587,882 times
Reputation: 4852
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
I doubt that's true all justice agreed on the equal protection clause requires identical treatment of different categories of persons.
https://www.thesocialcontract.com/ar...ler-v-doe.html



A free public education is not in the Constitution and a constitutional right. You are essentially arguing that illegals should have all the same rights as citizens.
So you are arguing with me about Plyler, yet didn't even read the case? Unbelievable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2019, 05:13 PM
 
5,462 posts, read 3,036,920 times
Reputation: 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tritone View Post
35 years ago a supreme court decision gave undocumented children the right to free public education in the United States. What was the result of that?

It gave people an incentive to smuggle children into the United States illegally because they know that they will be able to go to any public school. Then what happens when they grow up and finish school? They have needs but find out that they are not documented and don't have the rights of citizens - they become so called "Dreamers".

The Plyler decision created all of these problems. It was a horrible decision, that was actually cruel because they didn't think about what would happen to all those 'childhood arrivals' after they finished school. They need to go after Plyler in the Supreme court. DACA is just a consequence of it.
As if you are paying and they are not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2019, 05:15 PM
 
5,462 posts, read 3,036,920 times
Reputation: 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
I doubt that's true all justice agreed on the equal protection clause requires identical treatment of different categories of persons.
https://www.thesocialcontract.com/ar...ler-v-doe.html



A free public education is not in the Constitution and a constitutional right. You are essentially arguing that illegals should have all the same rights as citizens.
Education hasnt made many people any better. This forum is proof.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2019, 07:15 PM
 
3,850 posts, read 2,228,506 times
Reputation: 3129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
If we didn't provide illegal aliens free public education they likely will leave. That's another good reason for a law denying them.
We would just get working men. Nobody would bring children to the United States illegally if they couldn't go to school.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2019, 07:21 PM
 
19,966 posts, read 7,876,419 times
Reputation: 6556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tritone View Post
We would just get working men. Nobody would bring children to the United States illegally if they couldn't go to school.
And at least they wouldn't have anchor babies who we also have to pay to educate and shouldn't have to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2019, 09:25 PM
 
18,562 posts, read 7,375,874 times
Reputation: 11376
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEPLimey View Post
The judiciary sets the parameters, based on the Constitution, within which the legislature can create laws.
No. The Constitution sets the parameters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2019, 09:30 PM
 
18,562 posts, read 7,375,874 times
Reputation: 11376
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEPLimey View Post
If fiscal concerns drove the decision, then why were the children of undocumented aliens singled out? After all, a State may "not . . . reduce expenditures for education by barring [some arbitrarily chosen class of] children from its schools." Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618, 633 (1969).
THEY'RE FOREIGNERS!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:21 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top