Posted on 09/22/2004 10:59:54 AM PDT by Iron Eagle
Maybe so, but I feel the same way no matter how one says it.
Most all illegals drop out once they are required to take a state exam where "they" have to write and be competent in English.
The "mostly" Mexicans are using our school system as a baby sitting service. Most never graduate.
There is NO WAY Breyer, Souter, Bader-Ginsberg, Kennedy, and O'Connor will EVER vote to deny those poor huddled masses of illegal invaders the "right" to be educated by our tax dollars.
Like the cowbird, they will continue to lay their eggs in our school systems, social support networks, and maternity hospitals.
Thanks for posting and opening a discussion on this!
As others have asked, I also see the immigration problem in general (and not necessarily just the Supreme Court case at issue) as having two parts.
I know much of the argument for educating children in the country illegally is that since they are here anyway, if we don't educate them they will only cost us more money (and cause us more trouble) later. That argument always irks me, as it accepts defeat as its premise. Seems like there's a whole number of issues where some just accept the problem itself as NEVER going away - they just accept it. "If we don't allow needle exchanges, then the junkies will get sick AND high, rather than just high." "If we stigmatize unwed motherhood, then we are hurting the self-esteem of all those unwed mothers and making their lives harder." Etc etc etc. Another way to look at it is that if the consequences of some action are unpleasant, YOU WILL DISCOURAGE THE ACTION IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! Again, I may not be expressing myself clearly or providing the best examples - there's a human desire to be compassionate to someone who finds themself in a bad position, but there's also a practical need to make sure we don't create rules that ENCOURAGE THE NEGATIVE BEHAVIOR! No, we don't want kids to starve, but even FDR said welfare programs have a "narcotic" effect. If you know someone will bail you out, then you're not as worried about the consequences of certain actions. That's human nature too.
Although I am as disgusted as anyone about illegal immigration (and the total failure of either major party to do much about it), from the immigrants' point of view I don't blame them for coming over and taking advantage of all we have to offer. THEY ARE ONLY RESPONDING TO THE INCENTIVES WE CREATE!!! Our government needs to do something, beofre it's too late (if it isn't already).We should open our borders to cherry-pick the best and the brightest, if we allow immigration at all. Certainly we shouldn't have people breaking and entering and draining our public resources. The MSM is afraid to even point to the drain of illegals on our health and social services. I'm not optimistic.
As for the children born in this country of parents here illegally, I believe the 14th Amendment to the Constitution states that anyone born here is a citizen. It was drafted as one of the post-Civil War amendments to address the status of former slaves, I believe. I think Pat Buchanan and/or some others have called it a fatal flaw in the Constitution. I suppose the government could allow the child to stay and deport the parents, but I'd bet a month's pay that rarely happens, if ever. (I wonder what other countries allow someone to come in, give birth to a child, and then allow that child all the benefits of the state's welfare, education and health systems. THAT'S A RECIPE FOR FISCAL DISASTER, AMONG OTHER THINGS!!! Why bother to work and pay taxes if it just goes to people who don't have to work? open that wallet, sucker!!!) Anyway, I haven't really thought through the consequences of an amendment because it will never, ever happen.
I haven't even mentioned the cultural effects of large-scale uncontrolled immigration. But I'm ranting right now, so I'll stop.
:)
The solution to our illegal immigration problem isn't in labeling people "wetbacks". Nor is it amending our Constitution to disqualify certain people, born in the US, who we don't like. No matter what tactic is ultimately used to stem the tide of illegals, nothing will happen until the US develops the political will to address the issue. Directing anger at people who take the US up on what amounts to an open invitation to break our laws and enter here illegally is useless, and only gives the left more ammunition to call us hate-filled racists. Direct your disgust toward the politicians responsible. Form a lobbying group aimed at preventing illegal immigration. Write essays, letters-to-editors, etc. Be an activist.
O'Connor joined, and may have even written the dissent in the original case.
Interesting post! I sort of covered some of the same territory on my (long-winded) post 24. :)
Sound advice.
It appears this letter writer did just that. In fact, based on what is written, he is saying that Congress is powerless to act with respect to the public education aspect, because the Supreme Court has extended the Constitutional equal protection doctrine to illegal aliens to include the right to the privileges afforded citizens. Thus, on the distinct issue of a right to free public education, there are only two paths. 1) overturning the ruling of Plyler or 2) a Constitutional Amendment. Obviously, overturning the ruling is far easier.
With respect to the children born here to illegal aliens, that is a different issue. My personal belief is that there is no Constitutional basis, nor is there any common law support for rewarding criminal behavior with automatic citizenship. Indeed, as drafted, the provision arguably can only apply to U.S. Citizens.
Of course, we can fill a whole book, let alone another thread with that different debate. The real question here is, how does a small town in any state prevent illegal aliens (children who are here illegally) from stealing public resources? According to the Supreme Court, states are powerless? How can that possibly be right?
Article I, Section , Clause 15
15. To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions:
All members of Congress should be impeached for not doing their constitutional duty.
Let me be the first in a long time to say "I don't know."
My objection was to labeling some of the hardest-working people on the planet "wetbacks". The legal machinations required to make life miserable for people here illegaly now are not my expertise at all, but I'm generally in favor of them. There is a strategy in the works to require all Americans to prove citizenship to work, with heavy fines on companies that employ illegals. Proponents claim it is not a national ID, but a database of citizens available to employers.
The simple problem with this strategy is that we already have thousands of laws that no one has the guts to enforce. Long answer just to admit ignorance, huh?
Who are the majority of the "migrants" in the world today? Hispanics, Africans??? This country has only a given capacity (and an economic need) to absorb newcomers. If we greatly limited the number of Mexicans crossing the border, we would greatly raise the legal immigration limits and accept far more Africans. (Of necessity...Big-Ag needs chicken-pluckers.) Do you suppose that those who lobby for "unrestricted" illegal Hispanic immigration are simply trying to keep the really darkies out???
No.
We don't need all these immigrants, as you suggest.
A moratorium on immigration would be a good thing, to allow the current legals to assimilate.
This would be excellent news.
You're correct! The SUPREMES can "overturn"
anything at anytime.
And get banned from Free Republic for being a Bush Basher.
Well, let us all hope that the supreme court can remove their heads from their arses long enough to do the right thing this time around.
I love how a ruling for one case translates into a broad band policy.
Somebody stop the judges please!
"In Los Angeles, 95 percent of all outstanding warrants for homicide (which total 1,200 to 1,500) target illegal aliens. Up to two-thirds of all fugitive felony warrants (17,000) are for illegal aliens."
Just doing the crimes Americans won't.
Excellent. I have saved the page to read tonight. I read the first few paragraphs, and I was aware of the crime rates for illegals. Thanks for the link. Do you advocate any specific actions?
One interesting aspect of political involvement is that Democrats have long used the Courts to legislate and to bend, if not break Constitutional and legal principles. In essence, they have Courts enact legislation they cannot push through a legislature. (e.g. gay marriage, abortion, etc.)
Conservatives, however, never try to use the system to push back. They are always on the defensive. The Plyler decision is the perfect example of a decision just waiting to be reexamined. In essence, it is time to use the Courts to restore integrity to the Constitution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.