My thinking is based on what the United States Supreme Court ruled in
Foley v Connelie, 435 U.S. 291 (1978)
Chief Justice Burger, who delivered the majority opinion in
Foley v Connelie, substantiates beyond any reasonable question why
“. . . citizenship may be a relevant qualification . . . ,‘ in fulfilling
"important nonelective executive, legislative, and judicial positions . . . " in our democratic system.
As one can see, Justice Burger goes on to point out:
“This is not because our society seeks to reserve the better jobs to its members. Rather, it is because this country entrusts many of its most important policy responsibilities to these officers, the discretionary exercise of which can often more immediately affect the lives of citizens than even the ballot of a voter or the choice of a legislator. In sum, then, it represents the choice, and right, of the people to be governed by their citizen peers.”
Although the question of being hired by the state as a police officer falls within the category of a privileged occupation, it was not a primary issue in
Foley. But Burger’s fierce defense for New York excluding foreign nationals from being hired as police officers is a good indication if the question had been raised and litigated, he would have concluded such employment by the State does fall within a State’s created privileged occupations. As Justice Burger wrote:
“Clearly the exercise of police authority calls for a very high degree of judgment and discretion, the abuse or misuse of which can have serious impact on individuals. 7 The office of a policeman is in no sense one of “the common occupations of the community” that the then Mr. Justice Hughes referred to in Truax v. Raich, 239 U.S. 33, 41 (1915). A policeman vested with the plenary discretionary powers we have described is not to be equated with a private person engaged in routine public employment or other “common occupations of the community” who exercises no broad power over people generally. [435 U.S. 291, 299] Indeed, the rationale for the qualified immunity historically granted to the police rests on the difficult and delicate judgments these officers must often make.”
The only remaining question is, does extending that privileged type of state employment to non-citizens, abridge a federally protected privilege of Citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment (
“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.”) who are actively pursuing that type of employment?
It seems to be a self-evident fact that, for every non-citizen hired by the State of Illinois as a police officer, there is one less employment opportunity for the citizens of Illinois to be hired as a police officer, thereby creating an abridgment of a state created privileged occupation for Illinois’ citizens.
Now, instead of obfuscating, instagating and deflecting, how about addressing what Justice Burger stated above?
JWK
“There is no greater privilege than serving the people of New York City, and that privilege comes with a responsibility to keep yourself and your community safe," Mayor Bill de Blasio
LINK