Eric Holder: Public Schools, You will Enroll Children of Illegal Immigrants!

[RKMBrown]

That's true, Fish.

But, I think its more than that for the GOP. If they'd offer to accept some form of amnesty in exchange for whatever legal status we gave these folks to include no voting rights for anyone who came here illegally, I think the dems would have to take it.

I'm all for patrolling the borders. But the only way to actually be able to deport the folks we really need to deport, for our own security, is to shorten the deportation lines.

The kids are just an example. If a kid has a horror story back wherever he came from, but also has an employed family member here willing to care for him/her, why send him back? I can see we don't need more wards of the state, and if the kid's a hardened criminal, we don't want him. But if the kid has not committed some violent crime inside the US, and has a family of sorts, it makes no sense to me to add to the backlog of deportation cases that frankly are never gonna be heard anyway.

Stop them at the border first.

I stopped believing in unicorns a long time ago.

 

[Harry Dresden]

What is pathetic is the ignorance exhibited by you and others on the right where the Supreme Court determines what the Constitution means as authorized by the Constitution and doctrine of judicial review.

What is pathetic is the hate exhibited by you and others on the right where you seek to violate the 14th Amendment by denying undocumented immigrants their due process rights for no other reason than who they are.

And what is pathetic is the contempt you and others on the right exhibit toward the rule of law and the inalienable rights of all persons within the United States, where you would have politicians, bureaucrats, and capricious referenda determine who is or is not a citizen, and who will or will not have his inalienable rights.

No_Reply_Jones strikes again....the most irrelevant poster in this forum....

Jones has a long history here of throwing bombs, posting absurd and insulting remarks, and when presented with truth and documented facts which contradict his absurdities, there is no intelligent rebuttal.


JWK



Those who reject and ignore abiding by the intentions and beliefs under which our Constitution was agree to, as those intentions and beliefs may be documented from historical records, wish to remove the anchor and rudder of our constitutional system so they may then be free to “interpret” the Constitution to mean whatever they wish it to mean.

i dont think the stroonge has ever replied to a question asked of him....but he sure has a lot of bullshit to throw out.....why he even posts is a mystery....

 

[thereisnospoon]

.
.
SEE: Feds to schools: You must accept children of undocumented immigrants

”The Justice and Education Departments are teaming up to remind public schools that they are required to provide all children with equal access to education at the elementary and secondary level regardless of their parents' or guardians' citizenship or immigration status.”


Of course, Eric Holder, is relying upon a 1982 Supreme Court opinion, Plyler vs. Doe, in which the court intentionally misrepresented both the text and legislative intent of the 14th Amendment. The 14th Amendment declares:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

When the Court says "the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution is not confined to the protection of citizens” as distinguished from “persons”, it is absolutely correct. The amendment declares “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States”. But the amendment then goes on to extend a specific protection to “any person” as distinguished from “citizens” and forbids “any person” from being deprive of life, liberty, or property without due process being extended. Due process must be extended before “any person” may be deprived of life, liberty, or property, which is a very reasonable requirement and not in dispute. What is in dispute is Eric Holder’s assertion that a State’s public schools must enroll a foreigner who is not a citizen of the United States or of the State in which enrollment is applied for.

Getting back to the 14th Amendment, we come the wording which commands that “any person” within a State’s jurisdiction may not be denied “the equal protection of the laws” which have been established by a State. Note that these words do not even remotely suggest to negate the power of a State to create “privileges and immunities” for her “citizens” which are not afforded to “persons” who are not citizens. But the words do forbid a state to deny the equal protection of the laws, e.g., if a State decides to issue a driver’s learner’s permit to citizens of their state at the age of 16, then it may not refuse such a permit to any person who is a citizen based upon race or color to be in compliance with the legislative intent of the 14th Amendment. But denying the equal protection of the laws within the context of the 14th Amendment was not intended to, or does it, prohibit a State from making distinctions based upon citizenship with reference to “privileges and immunities” created by a States. A State’s public school system is within the category of “privileges” which a State may offer her citizens, and under the 14th Amendment’s legislative intent that privilege may not be denied to a State’s citizens based upon race or color. But it can be denied to those who are not citizens of the united States or of the state in question!

In fact, the legislative intent of the 14th Amendment was eloquently summarized by one of its supporters as follows:


“Its whole effect is not to confer or regulate rights, but to require that whatever of these enumerated rights and obligations are imposed by State laws shall be for and upon all citizens alike without distinctions based on race or former condition of slavery…It permits the States to say that the wife may not testify, sue or contract. It makes no law as to this. Its whole effect is to require that whatever rights as to each of the enumerated civil (not political) matters the States may confer upon one race or color of the citizens shall be held by all races in equality…It does not prohibit you from discriminating between citizens of the same race, or of different races, as to what their rights to testify, to inherit &c. shall be. But if you do discriminate, it must not be on account of race, color or former conditions of slavery. That is all. If you permit a white man who is an infidel to testify, so you must a colored infidel. Self-evidently this is the whole effect of this first section. It secures-not to all citizens, but to all races as races who are citizens- equality of protection in those enumerated civil rights which the States may deem proper to confer upon any race.” ___ SEE: Rep. Shallabarger, Congressional Globe, 1866, page 1293



The bottom line is, there is no provision in the Constitution of the United States which prohibits a State from exercising its reserved powers under the Tenth Amendment and refuse to enroll a foreigner in its public school system who has entered the United States illegally and is not a citizen. Each State would do well to tell Eric Holder to go fly a kite and refuse to enroll any child whose parents are unable to show their child is a Citizen of the United States and of the State in which they reside and wish to enroll that child in its public school system.


JWK

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people.___ Tenth Amendment

Fuck him....He doesn't pay the bills. Local taxpayers do that.
He has no say.

 

[thereisnospoon]

What happens if whites say no and cross this new Red Line?

Why have you found it necessary to bring up the race card?


JWK

Holder made it about race the moment he made reference to "Latino" or "Hispanic"
Put your pants back on and go home.

 

[thereisnospoon]

He's just following the law, hater dupes. Ay caramba.

Legalize and tax it, fools. The bs Pub war on drugs AND the Booosh world depression = this chaos- and the other ones too...thanks for stopping the phony crises at least- recovery finally.

How about kick them back to the country they came from.

Easier said than done, according to American law...

The law is unjust. Unjust laws can be ignored through nullification.
Just ask Obama.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Another slap in the face to the American people.

What does a guy like Holder care. He exists in a bubble. he probably lives in a wealthy gated community with its own internal police dept.

These fucking people would go ape shit if THEY had to take care of these kids.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Easier said than done, according to American law...

Doesn't mean the law can't be changed.

You can sure try but do you really want kids roaming the streets like packs of wild dogs? Personally I'd rather have them in school regardless of where they end up. Educated humans make the world a better place...

No....Send them back. And even if we can't, the streets are where most of them will end up.

 

[thereisnospoon]

He's just following the law, hater dupes. Ay caramba.

Legalize and tax it, fools. The bs Pub war on drugs AND the Booosh world depression = this chaos- and the other ones too...thanks for stopping the phony crises at least- recovery finally.

Constitutional Law ??

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
- See more at: Tenth Amendment - U.S. Constitution - FindLaw

They don't like that one. When libs hear "states rights" they automatically envision a covey of hicks in red states.
Then their hair catches fire.

 

[johnwk]

Court decisions which are not in harmony with the documented intentions and beliefs under which a provision of our Constitution was adopted are absolutely null and void!


I suggest you study the fundamental rules of constitutional construction, the primary rule being stated as follows:



The fundamental principle of constitutional construction is that effect must be given to the intent of the framers of the organic law and of the people adopting it. This is the polestar in the construction of constitutions, all other principles of construction are only rules or guides to aid in the determination of the intention of the constitution’s framers.--- numerous citations omitted__ Vol.16 American Jurisprudence, 2d Constitutional law (1992 edition), pages 418-19 - - - Par. 92. Intent of framers and adopters as controlling.



JWK





Those who reject and ignore abiding by the intentions and beliefs under which our Constitution was agree to, as those intentions and beliefs may be documented from historical records, wish to remove the anchor and rudder of our constitutional system so they may then be free to “interpret” the Constitution to mean whatever they wish it to mean.

null and void is null and void

However, if the gop had any interest in compromise, this would be a non-issue because there'd be a way to fast track deportation.

the truth is that both parties are scared shitless of losing the hispanic vote, so neither will do anything and our country is being overrun by disease carrying illegals, many of whom are dedicated to the destruction of this country.

THIS IS FUCKIN LUNACY.

Rep. Luis Gutierrez is one who is dedicated to the destruction of our country. CLICK HERE and learn who Luis Gutierrez really is! Start at 11:40

JWK


The Obama Administration is employing the same tactics used by Hamas. They hide behind woman and children while flooding our country with the poverty stricken populations of other countries!

 

[johnwk]

.

Today on the Neil Cavuto show Ben Stein was correct when he pointed out the “law” [I use quotes because there is no such law] requiring the various United States to extend the benefit of their public school systems to illegal aliens is “made up”. Ben is correct and the irrefutable fact is, there is no federal law to be found requiring States to extend the privilege of their public school system to children who are not citizens of the United States or of a particular State! The made up “law” is really nothing more than a LETTER sent out by the Obama Administration’s U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Justice, and is nothing more than an outrageous piece of propaganda designed to intimidate every State’s public school districts into opening their doors to alien children who are not citizens of the United States or of their State.

The letter states ”As Plyler makes clear, the undocumented or non-citizen status of a student (or his or her parent or guardian) is irrelevant to that student’s entitlement to an elementary and secondary public education. So, as it turns out, what is asserted to be a “law” is nothing more than the Obama Administration’s interpretation of the majority opinion in PLYLER v. DOE, 457 U.S. 202 (1982)


The majority opinion held with regard to specific conditions laid out and argued before the Court that ”If the State is to deny a discrete group of innocent children the free public education that it offers to other children residing within its borders, that denial must be justified by a showing that it furthers some substantial state interest. No such showing was made here. Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals in each of these cases is Affirmed.”

Every school district who received the above mentioned letter ought to use it for toilet paper and then send it special delivery back to Eric Holder or the Federal Department of Education and tell them to rub it on their chest! There is no such "law" as pretended by these despots.

JWK



The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion

 

[johnwk]

Rep. Luis Gutierrez to negotiate with Obama to legalize 3-5 million illegals

.
SEE: Rep. Luis Gutierrez: Executive Action Could Legaize 5 Million

Friday, 25 Jul 2014

”President Barack may be able to legalize as many as 5 million immigrants by executive action, Rep. Luis Gutierrez told MSNBC's "Morning Joe" Friday.

The Illinois Democrat said he was meeting with Obama and Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson later in the day "to negotiate additional terms and avenues the president can use" to make that happen with executive action.

"I think we can get 3 or 4, maybe even 5 million people" legalized as a result, he said.”


I wonder why our nation's black community is not marching in the streets in protest of this invasion of their county's borders which is draining vital resources needed to help America's own poor an needy.
.

JWK




The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. ___ Madison, Federalist Paper No. 47