In-state tuition for illegal immigrants is preserved with California Supreme Court ruling [Updated]

LA Times ^ | 15 NOV 2010 | Maura Dolan

[RU88]

The cesspool formerly known as Kalifornia continues it's descent into Hell. Tell Wing Wah or whatever his name is to come up with the cash to pay for his outrageous decision.

[screaminsunshine]

How could they prove you are not illegal?

[screaminsunshine]

Only if cut off by the Congress.

[stayathomemom]

So if they can document that they have been illegal for three years, they get in-state tuition? In other words, the longer they have been breaking the law, the better.

[Alberta's Child]

LOL. Thanks!

[OldDeckHand]

"But note the court's amazing sophistry. Instead of "residency" requirements, they have the requirement of attending Cal. high schools instead."

It's exactly like allowing the burglar to keep what he's stolen because - in the Court's opinion - how he entered the home is immaterial and whatever he "possess" (steals) his rightfully his just because he's there. Yes, it's sophistry.

Plyler v. Doe was a horrible decision 47 years ago, and its effects continue to ravage the nation.

[dragnet2]

The cesspool formerly known as Kalifornia continues it's descent into Hell.

Texas has the exact same law regarding In-State Tuition for illegal aliens.

[Excellence]

Campbell's has gone "halal." That means that meat used in their soups must come from animals slaughtered in an Islamic ritual; cut by a knife from neck artery, through the wind pipe and escophogas, and finally through the other neck artery, all the while chanting "Alluh ackbar." Think Daniel Pearl or Nick Berg. In other words, these animals are savagely, painfully sacraficed to their moon god, then introduced to our soups. This is certified by the Islamic Society of North America, number one partner of the Muslim Brotherhood, in thier effort to force absolutely everyone to live under Shariah law, irrespective of their stated belief. Please see the free, downloadabe PDF, Shariah, the Threat to America, published by the Center for Security Policy at www.shariahthethreat.com

[dragnet2]

Texas has the exact same law regarding In-State Tuition for illegal aliens.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

It's exactly like allowing the burglar to keep what he's stolen because - in the Court's opinion - how he entered the home is immaterial and whatever he "possess" (steals) his rightfully his just because he's there. Yes, it's sophistry. Plyler v. Doe was a horrible decision 47 years ago, and its effects continue to ravage the nation.

You got that right. Here is a joke in need of a punch line:

What's the difference between so called "Constitutional Law" and sophistry?

[stephenjohnbanker]

Picture 1 and picture 2 ;-)

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

Actually, a lot of picture 1 agrees with picture 2. “Constitutional Law” contains many anti-Constitutional principles.

The Constitution is something that fits in your pocket, written by brilliant patriots. “Constitutional Law” is not the same thing.