Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read Plyler v. Doe. Unless the Supreme Court overrules it (which would take several years, at least) undocumented kids are good.

And even if it's overturned, DCPS would not be *required* to consider immigration status. Given the mayor's speech today about being a sanctuary city and DCPS' poor job handling residency and enrollment documentation already, I can't imagine they will want to be in the situation of documenting immigration status.

How long will DC or any of the other cities remain sanctuary cities if federal funds are withheld, as pledged by DT.

Local taxes will have to increase to compensate.

then there really will be a rebellion. I pay enough in DC taxes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be unconscionable for our gov't to force an educator to take up the role of law enforcement.

But that is what so many people advocate for when it comes to non-DC residents attending DC schools. How many threads have appeared on DCUM lamenting that the principals of certain schools are not doing enough to verify and kick out non-residents. Some posters have even advocated that principals and teachers should stand outside every morning at drop off and try to make determinations of residency based on license plates. Seems a bit like law enforcement to me.

Are you a residence cheater yourself?

There's someone here constantly trying to mix two things that have nothing to do with each other.

Schools can and should verify residence rules (including residence rules pertaining to immigrants). But they are not the immigration police.

+1. I just reviewed the residency verification documents.

There are a variety of things you can submit that may or may not prove citizenship as well as residency.

Also, there are plenty of children who are not American citizens who attend DC schools. Citizenship is not a requirement to attend. There are several kids in my DD's class who are children of embassy workers. They are here legally, but they are not American citizens and never will be. All DCPS is interested in is verifying where kids live.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be unconscionable for our gov't to force an educator to take up the role of law enforcement.

But that is what so many people advocate for when it comes to non-DC residents attending DC schools. How many threads have appeared on DCUM lamenting that the principals of certain schools are not doing enough to verify and kick out non-residents. Some posters have even advocated that principals and teachers should stand outside every morning at drop off and try to make determinations of residency based on license plates. Seems a bit like law enforcement to me.

Are you a residence cheater yourself?

There's someone here constantly trying to mix two things that have nothing to do with each other.

Schools can and should verify residence rules (including residence rules pertaining to immigrants). But they are not the immigration police.

Anonymous wrote:

Yeah... not so much. The reason I absolutely can't get mad at Central Americans coming here illegally is that between about 1906 and 2006, the US sent troops to Mexico and Central America 106 times, in clear violation of those countries' sovereignty and international law, usually to protect the interests of the likes of United Fruit. We have absolutely zero moral leg to stand on here.

So your logic is that because Country A did something bad to Country B, the residents of Country B have a never-ending option to just go live in Country A whenever they feel like it?
Hmm. So, the Irish can just go plop themselves in Britain, the Chinese (and numerous other Asian countries) can just show up in Tokyo, the former subjects of the Ottoman Empire have a standing invitation to Istanbul . . . . ?

It is this type of reasoning (or lack thereof) that resulted in Trump getting elected.
Am I sympathetic to the fact that many Central American illegal immigrants fled terrible circumstances? Yes.
But there are a lot of places in the world with terrible circumstances, filled with would-be refugees who would like to immigrate here. Many of them may also come from countries which have---at some point in the past---been destabilized by the actions of the US or its allies. They have to go through the regular immigration process.

The US derives its amazing energy from its immigrants---I just think that there needs to be an immigration system that gives all would-be immigrants a fair playing field, not favor one group due to their geographic advantage resulting from a lack of oceanic barriers.

More "the inhabitants of Country A are laughable hypocrites when they talk about illegal immigration as a moral issue --- i.e. as being somehow 'wrong' because it's breaking the law." I get that you want people from other countries to follow our laws --- despite our constant and egregious violation of their sovereignty and international law --- because that's more convenient for you. Personally, I get them being exactly like you in doing what's convenient for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read Plyler v. Doe. Unless the Supreme Court overrules it (which would take several years, at least) undocumented kids are good.

And even if it's overturned, DCPS would not be *required* to consider immigration status. Given the mayor's speech today about being a sanctuary city and DCPS' poor job handling residency and enrollment documentation already, I can't imagine they will want to be in the situation of documenting immigration status.

How long will DC or any of the other cities remain sanctuary cities if federal funds are withheld, as pledged by DT.

Local taxes will have to increase to compensate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:none of you read the Supreme Court case on this actual issue that is mentioned on the first page of the thread, did you?

Plyler v. Doe. From 1982. When Reagan was president. Schools can't kick out undocumented kids who otherwise meet enrollment rules.

Yes. It is not legal for schools in the United States to require children to provide proof of citizenship. It is furthermore not legal for schools to ask questions that might create a "chilling effect" and result in families not enrolling their kids in schools because of fear of immigration action. Additionally, publicly funded schools are required by law to provide services to children who are not yet fully proficient in English.

These rights are drawn from Supreme Court case law (in addition to Plyler vs Doe, also Lau vs Nichols and Casteneda vs Pickard on the language rights). I'd say kids in DC are reasonably well protected. Our admin gets it and understands the implications. Places where kids are more vulnerable are in some of the other states (Hi, Arizona!), and also when they leave school There are are kids who are brought up in the US but don't have legal standing -- when they leave HS, they have difficulties in accessing higher education. Also, there aren't protections for the parents of these kids.

These are the kids I feel for the most. I have talked with many who were brought here when they were young. They don't remember anything else. Their parents acquired legal status through subsequent children. So they are the only ones in their family without legal status, they do not have any ties to their home country, they may speak the language, but they are not educated in the language. Its a horrible situation for them.

Anonymous wrote:It would be unconscionable for our gov't to force an educator to take up the role of law enforcement.

But that is what so many people advocate for when it comes to non-DC residents attending DC schools. How many threads have appeared on DCUM lamenting that the principals of certain schools are not doing enough to verify and kick out non-residents. Some posters have even advocated that principals and teachers should stand outside every morning at drop off and try to make determinations of residency based on license plates. Seems a bit like law enforcement to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:President-elect Trump basically said if they're naughty, they will have to go. If they're nice, they can stay.

His transition team is not backing that up - can't get to 3 million with just the 'naughty' ones.

He said 2 million, perhaps up to 3, but he led by saying only those with criminal records...not the "nice" ones.

Btw, let's remember that Obama deported 1.5 million immigrants in his first term.

Yeah, and Trump campaigned that that was not enough.

Anonymous wrote:Read Plyler v. Doe. Unless the Supreme Court overrules it (which would take several years, at least) undocumented kids are good.

And even if it's overturned, DCPS would not be *required* to consider immigration status. Given the mayor's speech today about being a sanctuary city and DCPS' poor job handling residency and enrollment documentation already, I can't imagine they will want to be in the situation of documenting immigration status.

How long will DC or any of the other cities remain sanctuary cities if federal funds are withheld, as pledged by DT.

Anonymous wrote:Dunno. Are they IB for their schools? Are we going after student for illegally sneaking from MD into DC for schools? Or from Anacostia into the Hill for schools? Do undocumented students from El Salvador enjoy diplomatic immunity?

As long as they're paying taxes, it affects the schools somewhat indirectly. Having said that, it's difficult not to laugh at the logical inconsistencies of emotionality over one form of border crossing (MD to DC = BAD!) and not the other (El Salvador to DC = GOOD!)

Good point

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, why shouldn't schools be required to report undocumented students? I'm troubled by the implication that being undocumented is perfectly A-OK. It isn't.

That attitude is why a lot of people went for Trump. I didn't, but I understand why people did.

Are your kids documented? Did Native Americans document your kids? Or did you have immigrants and their descendants document your kids?
I think the latter. In that case, why can't Salvadorians living here document the undocumented kids?
I don't understand why people voted for Trump, glad you do, because you don't seem to understand a whole lot other things.

This argument always makes me laugh. Did the Anglo-Saxons document the Norman invaders? Did the Marathas document the Mughals? Did the Gauls document the Romans?

All nations are "settler" nations if you go back far enough. Nation states have laws. Nation states exist only insofar as the laws are enforced.

I don't really follow this logic. Do you support the slavery that took place? If not, are you advocating for the removal of slave descendants?

Nope, of course not. My point is that if you consider a country's settler history to be justification for ignoring or decrying its immigration laws, then no country in the world has the moral grounds to enforce such laws. Not if you go back far enough.

In short, enforce the laws or scrap them -- but citing the violent history of conquest as a reason to ignore the laws only makes sense if you're opposed to immigration restriction for every country under the sun.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, why shouldn't schools be required to report undocumented students? I'm troubled by the implication that being undocumented is perfectly A-OK. It isn't.

That attitude is why a lot of people went for Trump. I didn't, but I understand why people did.

Because presumably their parents are the ones who broke the law, not the students.

Ok, and they can board a plane with them; seriously.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, why shouldn't schools be required to report undocumented students? I'm troubled by the implication that being undocumented is perfectly A-OK. It isn't.

That attitude is why a lot of people went for Trump. I didn't, but I understand why people did.

I agree.

of course that assumes the parents and community are all among the "criminals and gang members" which is a giant dog whistle for xenophobes and nativists

I would rather that the children of undocumented immigrants, many of whom were born here and are citizens as a result, go to school than be kept out of school because their parents are concerned that the schools will report undocumented families.

Let ICE focus on their own enforcement. The schools should be neutral on this matter, as their business is educating children.

Yeah... not so much. The reason I absolutely can't get mad at Central Americans coming here illegally is that between about 1906 and 2006, the US sent troops to Mexico and Central America 106 times, in clear violation of those countries' sovereignty and international law, usually to protect the interests of the likes of United Fruit. We have absolutely zero moral leg to stand on here.

So your logic is that because Country A did something bad to Country B, the residents of Country B have a never-ending option to just go live in Country A whenever they feel like it?
Hmm. So, the Irish can just go plop themselves in Britain, the Chinese (and numerous other Asian countries) can just show up in Tokyo, the former subjects of the Ottoman Empire have a standing invitation to Istanbul . . . . ?

It is this type of reasoning (or lack thereof) that resulted in Trump getting elected.
Am I sympathetic to the fact that many Central American illegal immigrants fled terrible circumstances? Yes.
But there are a lot of places in the world with terrible circumstances, filled with would-be refugees who would like to immigrate here. Many of them may also come from countries which have---at some point in the past---been destabilized by the actions of the US or its allies. They have to go through the regular immigration process.

The US derives its amazing energy from its immigrants---I just think that there needs to be an immigration system that gives all would-be immigrants a fair playing field, not favor one group due to their geographic advantage resulting from a lack of oceanic barriers.