Illegal attitude

[Old Man]

We have been discussing the politicians that are not moving on illegal immigration and the related problems.

Could this be part of the reason. They are afraid they will just be shot down by the Supreme Court?
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE">Lau vs. Nichols 1973, 414 U.S. 563, 94 S.Ct. 786 (1974)

In Lau vs. Nichols 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the San Francisco school system violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by denying non-English speaking students of Chinese ancestry a meaningful opportunity to participate in the public educational program

snip

Based on the Supreme Court's ruling, public school districts should consider the following practices in working with ELL students:

* School officials may not require children to prove they are in this country legally by asking for documents such as green cards, citizenship papers, etc. They may only require proof that the child lives within the school district attendance zone, just as they might for any other child.

* Schools should be careful of unintentional attempts to document students' legal status which lead to the possible &quot;chilling&quot; of their Plyler rights.

* The following school practices are prohibited
:

o Barring access to a student on the basis of legal status or alleged legal status.

o Treating students disparately for residency determination purposes on the basis of their undocumented status.

o Inquiring about a student's immigration status, including requiring documentation of a student's legal status at initial registration or at any other time.

o Making inquiries from a student or his/her parents which may expose their legal status.
[/QUOTE]Guiding Federal Court Cases on Equal Educational Opportunity (http://www.helpforschools.c om/ELLKBase/legal/Court_Cases_Federal_ Equa_Educ_Opp.shtml)

This case was from 1974. Whether or not it is still in affect, I don't know. I bring this up simply because we do have a Supreme Court that seems willing to &quot;legislate&quot; and sometime overrule with their &quot;legislation&quot; real legislation.

How much of a problem is the Supreme Court in tackling the problem of illegal immigration? Do they have the same rights once they get here in their opinion?

[Old Man]

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE">Imagine a national network of experienced lawyers available to illegal aliens, free of charge, to sue government at the local, state, and national levels to obtain housing, education, welfare, and other governmental benefits. Imagine further that this national network of lawyers was also available to lobby, participate in referenda campaigns, and provide public relations services on behalf of their illegal alien clientele, again free of charge because the network was largely subsidized with federal funds. For good measure, imagine that this network of activist lawyers was also available to fight deportation of illegal aliens, even those with serious criminal records.

There is nothing imaginary about the network of attorneys and the activities described above. The Legal Services Corporation (LSC), which has received over $5 billion in federal funds since its founding in 1974, supports just such a network of activist lawyers working in approximately 300 local programs across the country. An outgrowth of Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty, the federally-funded legal services program began with the best of intentions. Its proponents praised it as a noble effort to expand the type of legal aid which volunteer lawyers had traditionally offered the poor. [/QUOTE]
Illegal Alien's Legal Services Corporation (http://www.cis.org/articles/1997/IR29/boehm.html)

Where is your free lawyer?

Also this on Why the Legal Services Corporation Must be Abolished (http://new.heritage.org/Research/LegalIssues/BG1057.cfm)

[Old Man]

Another reason Identity theft is one of things organized and un-organized criminals set their sights on.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE">lthough illegal immigrants are ineligible for welfare, food stamps and other public service programs, they can obtain some of them by using false identification papers. It's a big business and not difficult to create an identity for this purpose. Other services, such as walk-in clinics, do not ask for identification at all, so patrons can simply make-up a name and social security number to get treated. Furthermore, hospitals, even if they know someone is an illegal alien, will not turn them away, and will not report them. All human beings must be treated for serious conditions. Even if facilities did report illegal aliens, the United States only has enough resources to deport a small fraction of all deportable aliens, and will always go after those who are commiting more serious crimes first.

All legal immigrants used to be eligible for welfare, food stamps and Medicaid. The 1996 law dictated that they would have to go through a long waiting period first. For example, family sponsors of new immigrants must provide an affidavit of support, proving their income and promising to support the immigrant for up to 10 years, which includes reimbursing the government for any public services the immigrant takes advantage of. The 1996 law has been softened to restore some of the benefits, under certain circumstances, but advocates feel there is a long way to go[/QUOTE]
Welfare &amp; Healthcare, Licenses for Immigrants in The U.S. (http://immigration.about.co m/od/ussocialeconomicissu es/i/WelfareHealthC.htm)

[jackbenimble]

Mass immigration and a welfare state are not really compatible. There is a temptation in welfare societies to set up unaffordable social programs that are funded by pyramid schemes based on ever increasing populations. But in truth what we are learning (and the Europeans are learning even faster) is that in a welfare state when you import immigrants with the hope of them propping up the system they in fact end up withdrawing more in services than they ever contribute. The poorer they are and the lower the education level of the immigrants, the worse the problem.

Regards,
Jack

[Old Man]

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE">The poorer they are and the lower the education level of the immigrants, the worse the problem.[/QUOTE]

This is so true. If people would stop and think about our own uneducated and how much their lack of skills and ability to communicate limit their opportunities, they should also realize why legal immigration is set up with controls concerning the ability of the person to find work and not be a burden to society.

I feel sorry for any person that is in a country that doesn't provide education and jobs and care, etc. But, as a society, our nation first has to look out for its own people. This is harsh to some, but it is a reality. A society that can no longer function well enough to care for its own, certainly will not be in a position to care for illegal immigrants.

[The Bandit]

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE">Schools should be careful of unintentional attempts to document students' legal status which lead to the possible &quot;chilling&quot; of their Plyler rights[/QUOTE]

Since they are quoting Plyler here there is little to no chance today's Supreme Court will give this any weight. Plyler is recognized as a political ruling.

If Bush is successful of putting 2-3 justices on the court who will rule on the letter and intent of the law then this kind of garbage will end up in the sewer were it belongs.