Anal Cranial Reversal
July 27th 2011 18:52
On Monday, July 25, the California Supreme Court upheld the state’s policy of granting in-state state tuition at its colleges and universities to students who graduated from a California high school and who are also illegal aliens.
The justices said that their ruling did not conflict with a federal ruling that barred states from giving any college benefits to illegal aliens on the basis of state residency. Instead, because the student benefited due to high school graduation, not residency, the state could give in-state tuition to any qualified student who attended a California high school and graduated.
In the 1982 Supreme Court decision, Plyler v Doe, based on the 1975 Texas laws denying funds for the education of illegal alien children, a 5-4 majority found this policy in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment (Section 1. “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.”); illegal alien children were “persons” and therefore were protected from discrimination.
The Fourteenth Amendment also grants citizenship to the children of illegal aliens born in the United States: “Section 1. 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.” The result of this has been the brisk trade of maternity clinics in California catering to pregnant Asian (mainly Chinese) women who want their children born in the United States so they will have U.S. citizenship. There is also the migration of pregnant women across the southern border from Latin America (they don’t have visas), who give birth in U.S. hospitals at taxpayer expense and then blend into the local Latino population.
Our own laws, and liberal state court and U.S. Supreme Court interpretations of them, have emboldened illegal immigrants and their supporters to make further demands. According to an April 4 article in the Daily Caller, the U.S. Justice Department has argued that illegal aliens in Irving, Texas be counted in the city’s census to set voting district lines. The basis of this argument is that without counting illegal aliens, Latinos would be under represented in some districts. “The central question is: will the voting power of American citizens be diluted because illegal aliens are given political representation. Eric Holder wants the answer to be yes.” (“Illegal aliens set to tilt Yakima, Wash. election scales by being included in district headcounts,” Caroline May, The Daily Caller, 4/4/11).
Every country has the right to reserve its assets, resources, wealth, privileges, and rights for those who belong in that country legally, except, apparently, this country. Every country has the right to deny entry to anyone looking to enter illegally, except, apparently, this country. And, every country has the right to expel anyone who has gained entry illegally, except, apparently this country.
Those who interpret our laws definitely have their heads up their asses.
The justices said that their ruling did not conflict with a federal ruling that barred states from giving any college benefits to illegal aliens on the basis of state residency. Instead, because the student benefited due to high school graduation, not residency, the state could give in-state tuition to any qualified student who attended a California high school and graduated.
In the 1982 Supreme Court decision, Plyler v Doe, based on the 1975 Texas laws denying funds for the education of illegal alien children, a 5-4 majority found this policy in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment (Section 1. “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.”); illegal alien children were “persons” and therefore were protected from discrimination.
The Fourteenth Amendment also grants citizenship to the children of illegal aliens born in the United States: “Section 1. 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.” The result of this has been the brisk trade of maternity clinics in California catering to pregnant Asian (mainly Chinese) women who want their children born in the United States so they will have U.S. citizenship. There is also the migration of pregnant women across the southern border from Latin America (they don’t have visas), who give birth in U.S. hospitals at taxpayer expense and then blend into the local Latino population.
Our own laws, and liberal state court and U.S. Supreme Court interpretations of them, have emboldened illegal immigrants and their supporters to make further demands. According to an April 4 article in the Daily Caller, the U.S. Justice Department has argued that illegal aliens in Irving, Texas be counted in the city’s census to set voting district lines. The basis of this argument is that without counting illegal aliens, Latinos would be under represented in some districts. “The central question is: will the voting power of American citizens be diluted because illegal aliens are given political representation. Eric Holder wants the answer to be yes.” (“Illegal aliens set to tilt Yakima, Wash. election scales by being included in district headcounts,” Caroline May, The Daily Caller, 4/4/11).
Every country has the right to reserve its assets, resources, wealth, privileges, and rights for those who belong in that country legally, except, apparently, this country. Every country has the right to deny entry to anyone looking to enter illegally, except, apparently, this country. And, every country has the right to expel anyone who has gained entry illegally, except, apparently this country.
Those who interpret our laws definitely have their heads up their asses.
| 27 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
