Feds: All kids, legal or not, entitled to K-12 ed

[Newsjock]

Source: Associated Press

The U.S. Department of Education has sent a letter to districts around the country reminding them that all students are entitled to a public education, whether they are legal or not.

The letter was sent to districts Friday. It tells districts that under federal law elementary and secondary students cannot be barred from enrolling on the basis of citizenship status.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/05/06/state/n161305D18.DTL&tsp=1

[HockeyMom]

1. Yes, yes, yes

and a Big THANK YOU.

[RKP5637]

2. Recommend!!! n/t

[cstanleytech]

3. Want to bet that this is challenged though using something along

the same lines that has been used to justify holding people in gitmo.

[psychopomp]

4. I like kids, but this doesn't make sense

How can illegal immigrants be entitled to education in the US?

[jberryhill]

6. Children only get to be educated once

We are talking about children here. Period.

They are here. Do you want them educated or not?

[woo me with science]

38. "Children only get to be educated once."

+1000000 Thank you.

[No Elephants]

93. +1 Brilliant post. Besides, they are here. We educate them for the same reasons we educate anyone.

For one thing, it's cheaper than having a huge criminal population, or should I say "huger."

[DRoseDARs]

7. Yeah, its a little confusing and is bound to cause all kinds of court headaches, but at least from

...a moral and ethical standpoint, this was a no-brainer call. Children are not responsible for the actions of their parents and really, how callous does one have to be to deny an education to a child in any circumstance?

[plumbob]

8. Well said. Even my little old daddy used to ask, "Why would uneducated

illegals be better than educated ones?"

And he was very much a Depression product. So if he could see that far, what excuse do some of these other folks have?

[freshwest]

11. A good man. Many of his generation suffered enough to never want to see others do without.

Most of the squawkers are afraid of losing status in this world, not their lives or health. When people lose all but their lives to the schemes of the wealthy, they yearn to be treated equally. Once you get there, you can't bear to see anyone mistreated. Empathy.

[The Blue Flower]

23. Beyond moral and ethical

It's the only practical thing to do. Do we want to live in a nation of uneducated, illiterate people, no matter where they're from? It would only weaken us as a society.

[No Elephants]

96. Bingo. Weaken us in every way, including financially.

People who have little realistic choice in life but to turn to crime are damned expensive, whether or not we arrest, try and imprison them.

[MH1]

14. a child is a child, not an 'illegal immigrant'

particularly the very young ones, have absolutely no choice.

there might be a case that some older teenagers have some choice. I don't know if I'd argue for that position, but it is true that some teenagers can be very independent. But certainly for the younger ones, there is no reason they should be further fucked over because of the situation their parents are in (regardless of the goodness or badness of the parents' choices).

[YvonneCa]

45. I like that...

..."A child is a child."

And as adults in our society, children depend on all of us...JMHO. :)

[Gormy Cuss]

18. How can they not?

Do you really think that it's better to let them age without an education simply because they're in the wrong country?

[CreekDog]

24. how can they be entitled to food, water, breathing?

this is not about a child --it's about you and the kind of person you choose to be.

and you've just indicated what type of person that is.

you would deny a little child the ability to go to school while you comfortably post on DU and likely are properly fed, housed, etc.

nice morality Ms. Rand.

[psychopomp]

33. I'm an expat

I go through a lot of trouble to stay where I am legally. The toleration of illegal immigration in the US is at absurd levels.

So, what I am saying is that illegal immigrants need to be deported. All of them, regardless of country of origin.

[forty6]

49. Yeah, because we can't possibly afford to let them stay...instead, let's

break up families, send people back into abject poverty, deny parents a chance to better themselves and their children, and turn them into enemies of the USA.

You were lucky enough to get here legally, lucky you! Millions were not, they are here now, sending them back will literally cost us MORE than keeping them here.

Reagan, Bush1, Clinton, Bush2 let these kids, (or their parents who gave birth to these kids) in...they are here now. Shipping them back to China, Mexico, Central and South America would be such a WONDERFUL statement of what we cannot tolerate: educating children who, through no fault of their own are here.

We need to ship them all back at tremendous expense to make sure of what? That you, the lucky one, keep your precious ego in tact?

Just get over yourself, and try to develop some practical problem solving skills

[psychopomp]

55. You seem to want to personalize the issue

Laws are laws. Yes, I was lucky to be born in the USA. For everybody else, if they want to become Americans we have a legal process to do so.

[ret5hd]

118. Explain to me the legal process for a poor Mexican.

[CreekDog]

51. how much will it cost to deport 12 million people?

the tax increase is okay with you i take it?

[No Elephants]

97. I'm guessing s/he is paying little or no U.S.taxes. Just a hunch.

[mwooldri]

59. So am I - a British ex-pat, but all children on US soil are entitled to an education. Period.

I also went through the required "hoops" to do things legally.

However, minors can not be held responsible for the actions of their adult parents/guardians in getting them to US soil.

I agree with you that illegal immigration is an issue in the USA. I don't agree with you about *all* illegal immigrants needing to be deported. Each case is different and needs to be judged on their own merits.

However because ICE are horribly understaffed and horribly overwhelmed it presently takes time to get to any illegal immigrant case. So in the meantime, minors in the United States irrespective of their citizenship or documented entry status should and must receive an education. It's a fundamental human right and I don't know where you came from but the United States and the United Kingdom are both signatories to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - and in that document it states that humans are entitled to a K-12 education (or equivalent in a local country).

[YvonneCa]

69. What a wonderful post. Thank you. n/t

[YvonneCa]

68. You'd deport millions of people? Is that really...

...what you think is a just solution?

[psychopomp]

72. A journey of a thousand miles...

[No Elephants]

98. Begins with a single step. We deport folks every day. We don't make a dent.

Again, please do some research, esp. since this subject seems so important to you, even though you no longer live in the U.S.

[No Elephants]

94. An American living in Mexico, by any chance? Hey, if you're an expat, why is this your business?

"So, what I am saying is that illegal immigrants need to be deported. All of them, regardless of country of origin."

Maybe, but your solution is totally unrealistic and, if it were even a possibility in real life, would be very, very expensive. Do some research.

[sofa king]

26. Because they are humans.

Exposing the children of illegal immigrants to American education hopefully spreads high regard for education around the hemisphere. Some of those kids will stay and become good Americans. Some will come back and become good Americans. And some will go home and become good Mexicans, Guatemalans, Canadians, and so on.

Because education is good for all humans. If we get to do the educating, we also get to spread values like public participation in government, the use of English as a diplomatic language, and the concept that all people are created equal.

It's that last part that makes it a requirement for us to offer such things even to those who are not here legally. Illegal does not mean unequal.

[proud2BlibKansan]

29. Would you rather have them in the streets?

Their families aren't going to go home if the kids can't go to school. And what do you think these kids will do while their parents are at work?

[psychopomp]

34. I remember that the US used to have truant officers

Why can't we have more today? Round up delequant kids and then deport the whole family.

[proud2BlibKansan]

40. School districts can't afford truant officers

Their budgets have been drastically cut.

I also don't think you understand how much law enforcement would be involved in your plan. It's just not realistic.

[psychopomp]

46. This has to be a national priority

The money can be found. At any rate, the savings on not teaching the children of illegal immigrants can go towards paying for the truant officers and law enforcement.

[proud2BlibKansan]

48. I can think of a lot of things that would be better uses of any found money

[YvonneCa]

67. Define 'This'...

...please. IMO, educating children has to be a national priority...and yes, if it is, the money can be found.

[No Elephants]

95. ? The job of truant officers is--or was-- to make sure kids are in school.

[harmonicon]

31. what doesn't make sense....

is that anyone could be considered to be an illegal immigrant anywhere. We are human beings with free will, and we should all have the right to live and travel as we see fit. Why should an imaginary political border put in place beyond almost all living humans' control dictate the limits of our freedom?

[psychopomp]

35. Good grief. Are there unicorns in your world?

In our nation we have rules and laws concerning our borders. Every country does it.

[harmonicon]

37. Every country does it, and no country should.

So, I live in the UK now, and I've got a visa. What would be different in my life if I didn't have this visa? Nothing, really. I was without a passport for a few months while I was getting my visa renewed. Apart from not being able to leave the country, I was fine. The world didn't implode. I would still live here if a visa weren't required. My world consists entirely of real things, like the recognition of the very real fact that political borders are imaginary - just like unicorns!

[No Elephants]

99. Are there unicorns in YOUR world?

We're living in a world where facts and practical reality exist. You seem to be living in one where your unresearched, unsupported opinions are the only reality.

" In our nation we have rules and laws concerning our borders."



We have laws about many things. Controlled substances, for one. Care to guess how many folks in America use Controlled substances in an illegal way and/or operate vehicles "under the influence?" And I'm not referring only to those who get caught or have accidents. We enforce those laws as well as we feasibly can, same as we do immigration laws.


"Every country does it." Um, no. Yet again, do some research.

Many countries don't have much of a problem to begin with. Those that are perceived as "lands of opportunity" for poor folks do have a large population of undocumented aliens.

[sudopod]

32. A free education is a human right, Mr. Knowledge is Power. nt

[psychopomp]

36. It is a right of American citizenship.

I know that much.

[jberryhill]

39. Oh, really? And where is this written?

Please identify the school systems which exclude legal non-citizen permanent residents.

I'll just wait right here.

[psychopomp]

43. You understand my point

A caveat is made for non-citizen permanent residents.

[jberryhill]

52. Oh really? Where?

Could you please identify the place, other than your own imagination, where this is written down?

Since you also seem to have skipped exchange students, who are not citizens nor permanent residents.

I'll wait right here. Any standard citation format will do.

[psychopomp]

56. I think that discussions of "rights" tends to become one of commonly held assumed privileges

This is one more example.

[No Elephants]

110. "commonly held assumed privileges?" Jaysus! What a word soup salad sandwich.

Do you mean a commonly held, but incorrect, assumption about privileges? If so, you seem to have a large share of those, if your posts on this thread are any indication.

[psychopomp]

58. You are really reaching, don't you think?

Exchange students have visas.

Start telling Americans that they have to pay for primary education and we'll see how soon the matter becomes a discussion of rights.

[No Elephants]

102. Not sure we do, psychopomp. To have people understand your point, you have

to express yourself accurately.

If you understand you took a position on education that is contrary to existing law--and the OP--you should not have said that education is a right of American citizens.

Seems as though you meant, "A free education is a right of all minors present in the U.S. under existing law, but, in my personal opinion, formed without having done much research into the relevant issues, the law should be changed to deny thst right to innocent children whose parents entered the country in violation of immigration laws."

And, while we're on the subject of needing to say what you mean, I think you may mean "exception," not "caveat."

[proud2BlibKansan]

41. How do you know that?

[jberryhill]

53. From the Book Of Stuff I Make Up As I Go /nt

[YvonneCa]

70. Do you know how to tell a child's citizenship...

...by looking at them? Do they have a stamp on their forehead? Can you tell by listening to them...looking at their names on a list? Is there some other way to tell?

[No Elephants]

101. No, you don't know "that much." You simply made that up, which seems

to be the case with many of your assertions on this thread.

Clearly, if the feds are "reminding" school districts that every minor present in the U.S. has a right to a free education, your post is 100% wrong.

[mwooldri]

60. Start here:

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

[totodeinhere]

74. Does it's being a human right obligate any country to educate any and all children no matter

what the circumstances are? It should be the responsibility of the country where you have citizenship to ensure your right to an education. We in the USA don't have the resources to educate all of the children of the world. We can't even adequately educate all of our children who are citizens, let alone everyone else in the world.

[sudopod]

119. >Implying that anyone said that we're responsible for the human rights of everyone in the world. nt

[YvonneCa]

44. Because I, as their teacher, am not...

...an agent of the INS. I educate...I do NOT check citizenship. Having said that, most public schools do their best to establish residency for all students.

The second part of that argument is that so many children ARE HERE and are likely to remain so for a long time. We will all benefit by making sure they learn to read, write and do math...develope the skills necessary to be productive in society.

[psychopomp]

47. You are correct, it is the principal's job to sort it out

I know the reality is that the kids are here. They do not need to remain here; their families need to be lawfully repatriated.

[jberryhill]

54. Illegals have done more for me than you have

How about you go pick some lettuce for my grocery store?

They pay sales taxes, their landlords pay property taxes. Why should my tax dollars go to removing productive people from this country? What is it I get for that?

[psychopomp]

57. Based on what?

I suggest your comparison is based on your own assumptions.

[YvonneCa]

62. Principals are not...

...enforcers of immigration law. That is NOT their job...their job is to create conditions where education can occur.

[psychopomp]

63. Don't they also determine whether a student should be expelled?

[proud2BlibKansan]

65. Expulsions are based on behavior, not birthplace

[YvonneCa]

66. No. District policies...

...in accordance with state law...determine that process.

[psychopomp]

73. Okay, so who is the arbiter of that process?

[YvonneCa]

84. School Board...

...in accordance with state and district policy. Currently, most districts do not have a policy that makes them immigration agents.

[No Elephants]

105. School boards do not have any power to make themselves immigration agents, no

and matter what policies they may purport to adopt. Please see Replies 92 and 104.

[YvonneCa]

117. We agree. n/t

[No Elephants]

103. Um, yes, if you're referring to being expelled for violation of school policies. Schools and school

districts don't make OR enforce immigration policies. The federal government does.

If you care so much about a subject, you really should look into it.

[No Elephants]

104. Nope. You made that up, too. It's not the job of any school official or any

school district official. U.S. Constitution and federal laws enacted pursuant to the U.S. Constitution says whose job it is. And, per the OP of this thread, the people whose job the U.S. Constitution and federal laws enacted pursuant to the U.S. Constitution say it is are reminding school districts that all kids in the U.S. have a right to a public school education.

[mwooldri]

61. UN Declaration of Human Rights. US is signatory to this.

Eleanor Roosevelt of all people was fundamental in the crafting of this document, which basically is what any United Nations member has signed onto.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

Check out Article 26.

[No Elephants]

100. Why "of all people?"

[No Elephants]

92. No kid--no human being--is "illegal." An action can be illegal, like

murder or parking in the wrong spot or entering the country without having followed the proper procedure. However, a human being cannot be "illegal."

Regardless of how you feel about the underlying issue, please do not adopt RW framing and languaging designed to inflame us and de-humanize them.

In answer to your question, the Constitution places immigration and naturslization issues solely with the federal government, so that laws on those subjects are "uniformm." The Constitution also says federal law is supreme over state law.

Beyond that, almost all public schools are taking gobs of money from the federal government. Usually, the red states, which tend to be harshest on undocumented immigrants, are overall taking federal money at the expense of the blue states. And you know the golden rule--he who has the gold--and the Constitution on his side-- makes the rules. It's that simple.

So, given all the above, all children present in the U.S. are legally entitled to a publlic school education for the same reason oil companies are entitled to tax subsidies and Warren Buffet is entitled to pay federal taxes at a lower rate than his secretary. be

Whether any of that is wise or just is an entirely different, and much more complex issue. As to education, reading this entire thread thoughtfully, and without knee jerk responses,would be a start on analyzing a few of the complexities.

[CBGLuthier]

116. You mean how can people who were brought here at the age of two months

expect to be given anything. Yes, those children should have lunged out of their parent's arms and drowned themselves in the river rather than become "illegal immigrants." and dare to expect a chance in life.

Hard hearted fucking nation. We spend more money on toilet paper for our fucking armies than we do on a hundred children's educations. I hope whatever country replaces us can have a fucking heart.

[Downwinder]

5. Isn't school attendance mandatory in most States?

[DRoseDARs]

10. This is about the children of illegal immigrants, and possibly homeless children.

Whatever the case, no child should ever be denied an education. Children are not responsible for the actions of their parents, nor are they responsible for their family's homelessness. Most districts require an actual address and quite a few probably check for legal residency (a check which may be of questionable legality in-and-of-itself). I'm sure there are plenty of non-bigoted reasons to do both but whatever the motivation or justification, ultimately they should never end up blocking the child from an education. There was that woman just this past month that had the law come down on her head because she had the nerve to be homeless and tried to have her child attend school from a friend's address. Quelle horreur, I know. Now imagine the minefield illegal immigrant families have to navigate trying to get their small children off to a good start to their futures, regardless if the little ones were born on this soil or not.

It's a very tough subject from a legal standpoint, but at least it has the weight of morality and ethics behind it.

[No Elephants]

106. Why is it a very tough subject from a legal standpoint? Federal law is all that matters

and, if the OP is any indication, federal law seems clear. School boards may have to re-write their rules from the 1820s to encompass homeless kids,, that's all. I don't think that should be very difficult.

As to federal law governing, please see Replies 92 and 104.

[kestrel91316]

9. Was somebody actually trying to deny the children of illegal aliens

a BASIC K-12 EDUCATION??? Oh, THAT will solve society's problems, alright.

I may not approve of women deliberately seeking to bear "anchor babies" and people coming across the border illegally in general, but this is beyond the pale. FFS.

[DRoseDARs]

13. You'll probably catch some flak for "anchor babies" but I do see your point.

I doubt most illegal immigrants cross for that purpose, and that's really more a rightwing talking point/scare tactic than anything. While I do wish they would follow the law, it's not like they're smuggling AK-47s in their vaginas. I won't begrudge someone trying to find a better place to live than whatever shithole country they're trying to get away from, or at the very least try to make money here to support their family back wherever they came from. Weak as the dollar is, it still goes a hell of a lot farther in poorer countries than their native monies.

The basic education of children (K-12) is, however, something that should be completely divorced from the immigration debate and the Dept. of Education agrees.

[jberryhill]

17. I think regardless of one's view of immigration policy and enforcement...

...that all reasonable people would agree that children should be educated.

It's not even a question that involves whatever else one believes about immigration. Honestly, if people don't think children belong in school, then such persons are not legitimate participants in a policy discussion on much.

Our human decency should be larger than our nationality.

[Honeycombe8]

89. Correction....illegal "immigrants" (they're not really aliens...at least they don't look like E.T.)

nt

[No Elephants]

107. Um, no. Science fiction does not define the word "alien." Google the definitions of "alien" in the

free online dictionary. "Alien" is used in many laws.

As for the propriety of calling an immigrant, or any human being, "illegal," you might google that as well. You could start with my reply 92, if you wish.

"Undocumented aliens" or " undocumented immigrants," are both preferable to "illegal immigrants," or its revoting derivative, "illegals."

[Lance_Boyle]

122. Incorrect - 'aliens' is the proper term for non-citizens.

Legal or illegal, non-citizens in the US are aliens.

[defendandprotect]

12. GOP will be working a bit harder next week to destroy Dept. of Education -- !!!

[alp227]

15. a more effective and enforced immigration system would prevent govt from doing this

the supreme court case Plyler v. Doe is what makes this federal law. It was a 5-4 decision not exactly on party lines; JFK nominee Byron White dissented, while Nixon nominees Harry Blackmun and Lewis Powell concurred with the majority. It was on the grounds of the Equal Protection Clause. I re-read the 14th Amendment Equal protection clause: "No State shall...deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Hmm, that's right, any person, not limited to citizen! (The 14th Amendment specifically did refer to citizens too.) Of course the 14th amendment (or at least the way those leftist pinko activist judges interpret it) pisses off conservative because of, y'know, the gays and illegal anchor babies.

However, the federal government got themselves into this mess by not enforcing laws against hiring those illegals in the first place so companies get incentive for cheap slave labor. The problem arises, and now the government puts itself in a compromising position. Here's what to do: have illegals here pay a fine/back taxes, learn English, and go through a background check to get temp residency or else they have to leave. And levy stiff penalties on companies that hire illegals. And of course guard the borders. And make the immigration system more efficient and drop those country-by-country quotas.

Oh, don't forget how SFGate.com comments sections in articles about immigration, death penalty, crime, public employees, etc. get swarmed with negative, hostile, bigoted comments that get the most favored votes. (Not on other articles though such as those about Prop. 8, or other topics, I guess that traffic is coming in because of Free Republic, right-wing blogs, etc.) How many people have actually heard that illegal immigration to the US has DECREASED over the past decade?

[harmonicon]

30. learn English?

Thankfully, the US does not have an official language. Would you also like all US citizens who don't speak English to be kicked out of the country?

[alp227]

76. I've heard that "learn English" talking point circulated among immigration reform proponents

but to clarify i think i meant learn enough english to pass the citizenship test

[harmonicon]

85. why shouldn't the citizenship test be given in any language?

Seriously, I think that the lack of an official language is part of what sets America apart and makes it great. Sure, I only know English, and my non-English ancestors who moved to the US learned the language eventually (at least in part), but I think moving towards having an official language would really be a downfall. Despite the many ways that the US falls behind most first-world countries, we have some things going for us, and I think the kind of flexibility that not having an official language affords is one of them.

[alp227]

86. well if you wanna survive in america you gotta be english proficient

the government doesn't make English official, but the people of America have created an English-language dominant society that means road signs, food labels, etc. in that language. so that's why while i oppose any official language my stance is that it's important to learn English if you want to assimilate into our society, just like if you want to relocate to a foreign country you'll need to know their language too.

[harmonicon]

87. and you live in California?!

I lived in CA off-and-on for over 4 years, and many places that I lived or visited, English was not the predominant language. This was also true of parts of Chicago, when I lived there, but not nearly to the same extent as LA. I think it's fine if the USA is a predominantly Spanish speaking country in 50 years. It's no skin off my teeth. I understand that we in the west - English, French, Spanish, etc. speaking - are the minority in the world, and will be for the rest of our lives, and that's ok. Instead of looking at language as something that divides us, we can look at it as something that unites us; the EU and US may have many official languages, where as China (our overlord) has only one.

[No Elephants]

108. Please see Replies 92 and 104 as to sources of federal authority in this matter.

Also reply 92 as to using the term "illegals."

"Here's what to do: have illegals here pay a fine/back taxes, learn English, and go through a background check to get temp residency or else they have to leave. And levy stiff penalties on companies that hire illegals. And of course guard the borders. And make the immigration system more efficient and drop those country-by-country quotas."

Cool. However, what you propose requires new laws--and you know how "easy" that is in our sharply divided country. Of course, we'd need tons of money to find and arrest people who are living in the shadows, not to mention things like appeals. And you also have to find and charge employers who are paying people "under the table," something we've never been able to do, even for employees who were born here. Also a huge expense for our immigration, law enforcement and judicial systems, assuming it's even possible.

Border enforcement? How many would we have to hire, how much would it cost and where the hell are we going to get the money? For pity sakes, we have Democrats talking about cutting fuel subsidies, Medicare and the pittance OASDI gives the elderly and disabled.

How about fences? How high and deep do they have to be to prevent people from climbing over them or tunneling under them, esp. when getting people into the U.S. illegally is a profitable industry? How thick do they need to be? Or should we just make the fences so that every child, adult and animal who touches any part of them, above ground or below, even accidentally, dies? And how much would that cost and where would the money come from? And would it be like Iraq, where we no sooner build a bridge than someone blows it up and Halliburton (by whatever name) has to start all over?

It's fine to hypothesize about how much we'd save over time, but we'd need to pay for this stuff now, even assuming we knew exactly what the hell we needed.

If this issue were easy, it would have been handled decades ago.

[intheflow]

16. Right on!

Finally something decent and affirming coming out of this Dept. or Education!

[IronicNews]

20. IntheFlow

Beautiful username :)

[No Elephants]

113. Op says this is a reminder of existing law/policy.

[IronicNews]

19. Maybe this won't make me popular....

but when I think of all the indoctrinating I got during my 'education' I sometimes think I would have been better off taught to read and left with some books in the woods behind my house all day. Too Emersonian?

[Downwinder]

21. I think you would have liked my two room school.

[intheflow]

22. No. Too Thoreauian.

:hi:

[Keith Bee]

25. "When I think back on all the crap I learned in high school.....

...it's a wonder I can think at all." ;-)

[primavera]

27. And with all the rightwing, religious brainwashing going on nowadays...

... it's all the more true.

[EFerrari]

64. I'm like that, too.

You could have left me alone with a stack of books and I'd have been fine. But not everyone learns that way.

[No Elephants]

109. Self delete.

[nxt1]

28. Good

I think this is a good move a child is a child like was said earlier. Everyone legal or not should be entitled to education.

[alp227]

77. the CONs don't realize that America is exceptional for its opportunities

it's so ironic how they howl about those "dirty smelly immigrants bankrupting our schools" when they don't realize that America is great because it allows immigrants the opportunity to work hard and succeed

[totodeinhere]

78. No, American exceptionalism does not exist. By any objective measure there are

many countries that are better than the USA is. We can't even begin to talk about American exceptionalism as long as Americans are dying from the lack of proper medical care.

Edited for typo.

[joshcryer]

91. Go to those "many countries" and tell us how inclusive they are.

They have no where near, none of them, the immigration friendly society that the United States has nurtured for the entirety of its existence.

[No Elephants]

111. Um, no the U.S. has not been an immigration friendly society for the entirety of its existence.

[Solly Mack]

42. k/r

[Blandocyte]

50. Smilie! :-)

[Oasis_]

71. It is settled law (SCOTUS 1982 decision)

As another poster noted upthread. Therefore, the memo is instructing individual districts to comply. However, I would have zero problem with ICE obtaining records of those enrolled where citizenship has not been established in order to possibly begin deportation proceedings against the parents.

We have borders. They are real and are to be respected. Illegal immigrants have already committed a crime based solely on their presence here alone, which is why I support a much greater degree of funding for ICE and the secure communities program so we can enforce our immigration laws.

We have a process in place for legal immigration. There should be consequences--not rewards--for those who have ignored and flagrantly defied our laws.

It's true we'll never be able to successfully deport 12+ million illegals, but that doesn't mean we should relax our standards.

Oasis

[psychopomp]

75. Finally, a common sense reply

Thank you for taking the time to put the issue in a reasonable perspective.

[alp227]

79. yes, let's find a compromise between 100% amnesty and 100% deportation

neither is right or fiscally responsible. Those who pass a background check--having no criminal convictions besides unlawful presence in the country--should be allowed conditional, temporary residency for several years to begin their path to citizenship. Those who have committed severe, violent crimes or have lengthy records already even of misdemeanors like traffic violations, vandalism, etc. should be deported and have a lifetime ban on re-entry.

[Oasis_]

81. Excellent post

Although I tend to side (at least philosophically) with deportation and no form of amnesty, I completely agree it's unworkable, and I'd enthusiastically support your plan. It addresses all of the concerns voiced from both sides of the debate, and better yet--provides a real and tangible solution.

Good work.

Oasis

[Honeycombe8]

88. A lifetime ban on re-entry? That's what "illegal immigrants" have now, and it doesn't work.

Unless the govt comes up with a plan to stop illegal immigration, there can be no such thing as a lifetime ban on re-entry. After all, illegal immigrants are already banned from entering, and that doesn't stop them. That's why they're "illegal."

So you supposedly ban those with a criminal record, then what....you listen to the cries of people not wanting to deport the criminal, because he now has a family here. And if, by some miracle, he does get deported, he just comes right back.

That's the crux of the problem for us. As well as whatever the hell is going on with Mexico's government to make all of its people want to leave. (And no, it's not the drug cartel.) Mexicans have free health care, right? And yet, they still want to move to America to make $$$ to send it back to Mexico, and have children here, who are automatic citizens, and thus ensure that the illegal will never be deported. It's a clever game. And it works.

(I live in an area burdened under the heavy cost of illegal immigration...the schools and the hospitals are costing the average person a small fortunre, to pay for illegal immigrants' health care and education. Ironic, when you think of it. The average American has too much $$$ to get free health care, so he pays for the illegal immigrants' free health care, while he goes without.)

[alp227]

90. umm, border security? easier legal immigration?

Those are the basic ideas i can think about right now, but many of those people who cry "secure the border!" also are unwilling to pay for it. And I am clueless of why those who immigrate to the US illegally can't do so via the legal channels. Because it's too expensive? slow? And as for lifetime bans on re-entry I heard this story from Seattle about a suspected rapist http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8405732">who'd been previously deported NINE TIMES! But keep in mind that illegal re-entry does have a serious federal prison term of at least 2-5 years if I recall correctly.

[No Elephants]

114. Generalities seem deceptively easy. Our ability to find undocumented aliens

is limited.

A background check on them by government would have to pass 4th amendment muster. That means court cases and maybe court appointed attorneys.

Who is going to perform those checks? Government employees who need salaries, health care, pensions, reimbursement of expenses, real estate for offices, etc., or will we hire some Blackwater type private company? In either case, what will it cost us, again assuming we can find evderyone?

ETA: Of course, all the above assumes Republicans and Democrats can come together on all the details of a law re: a hot button issue for the bases of both parties.

[totodeinhere]

80. It would not be practical de deport them all. Everyone knows that. However, if we

can give them incentives to return to their countries of origin, many will go home of their own free will. Most are here only as a last resort and would rather live in their own countries but they have been forced out by abject poverty and no hope for the future. We need a foreign policy that will encourage third world countries to do everything possible to raise the standard of living of their residents so that they don't have to leave. We can start by withholding support for the oligarchy that controls Mexico. The income disparity between the upper class that controls the country and everyone else is astonishing.

And yes I know that the income disparity in the USA is also bad and getting worse. But nevertheless is pales in comparison with Mexico.

[Wednesdays]

82. Which of the 12+ million should we go after?

How many of them? How will this be enforced, and how will this be funded?
:shrug:

[Oasis_]

83. Post 79

From alp227 is very workable solution and great compromise, imo.

Oasis

[No Elephants]

115. Please see Reply 112.

[CreekDog]

120. Get them on a path to legalization and get them paying into SS and Medicare

they will help support both systems with their predominantly workforce-aged population, making for a more healthy ratio of workers to recipients.

and making them legal will encourage them to get educated and then get higher paying jobs.

making them legal will give them more access to protections for workers which will make it less easy to undercut legal workers with illegal ones.

also, the flow of illegal immigrants is far down thanks to our bad economy.

immigrants have always made this country better, not worse.

[No Elephants]

112. Please see Replies 92., 99. ,108.and 114.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

121. Correct. It's not a school's business to do the INS's work for them.

If they want to investigate people suspected of having entered the country illegally, they are perfectly free to do so on their own budget.