[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.

[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?