<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--Generated by Squarespace Site Server v5.11.5 (http://www.squarespace.com/) on Fri, 30 Jul 2010 23:30:32 GMT--><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0"><channel><title>Plyler v. Doe (1982)</title><link>http://www.basicallylaw.com/plyler-v-doe-1982/</link><description></description><lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:46:49 +0000</lastBuildDate><copyright></copyright><language>en-US</language><generator>Squarespace Site Server v5.11.5 (http://www.squarespace.com/)</generator><item><title>Plyler v. Doe (1982)</title><dc:creator>Paul</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:38:14 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.basicallylaw.com/plyler-v-doe-1982/2009/12/1/plyler-v-doe-1982.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">423563:5318993:5955418</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>Read the opinion <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0457_0202_ZS.html">here</a>.</p>
<p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Issue</span></strong>.&nbsp; Is a local town ordinance that excluded undocumented children from Texas's public school unless they paid a full tuition fee, violate the Equal Protection Clause?</p>
<p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Background</span></strong>.&nbsp; A class action lawsuit was brought on behalf of undocumented children who could not be enrolled in certain Texas public schools unless they paid a "full tuition fee."&nbsp; Lower federal courts ruled that exclusion of undocumented children violated the Equal Protection Clause.&nbsp; The Supreme Court agreed.</p>
<p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Court's Analysis</span></strong>.&nbsp; Even though undocumented aliens are not a suspect class and a free public education is not a fundamental right, the Supreme Court found that the State still had to come up with a justification that showed its law furthers some substantial interest.&nbsp; The State failed to do so in this case.</p>
<p>While undocumented aliens may constitute an underclass in the United States, it does not mean the government cannot refuse to extend benefits to this underclass.&nbsp; Still, children are special members of this underclass.&nbsp; They did not illegally enter this country under their own free will.&nbsp; The same is true about their remaining in the United States.&nbsp; There is no rational reason why they should be denied a benefit that is provided to the children of citizens who are legally here.</p>
<p>Denying the children of undocumented alied access to free public education further punishes them and creates the likelihood of a lifetime of hardship on a discrete class of children because of the actions of their parents.&nbsp; The Equal Protection Clause will not allow for this.&nbsp; As the Court recognized:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>[The law] is directed against children, and imposes its discriminatory burden on the basis of a legal characteristic over which children can have little control.&nbsp; It is thus difficult to conceive of a rational justification for penalizing their children for their presence within the United States.</p>
</blockquote>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.basicallylaw.com/plyler-v-doe-1982/rss-comments-entry-5955418.xml</wfw:commentRss></item></channel></rss>