Why hasn't the Supreme Court voiced an opinion on illegal immigration?
Answer:
Whats the point. We already have existing laws that aren't enforced. Whats the point of making new ones. The whole argument is
Democrats are trying to push for amnesty at the same time they push for Universal healthcare so they can get the votes.
Republicans want guest workers so they don't have to pay an American as much
Its a lose lose situation. And nobody in Washington cares about you or me. Just votes and $.
No, they only hear cases that are brought before them. They don't just voice their oppinions.
Bring a case before them. It is up to the court to decide if the case has merit
Yes.but not until someone appeals the case up the supreme court. So far that hasnt happened
The Supreme Court ONLY acts when it is deciding a case that has been brought from an appelate court.
It doesn't 'voice' any opinion on current issues.
They dont need to say anything because illegal immigration is all ready illegal, those who are caught are prosecuted and kicked out. Its like the supreme court saying, "We have had an epiphany, Murder is bad!!".
Since its already illegal they cant really say anything, and also they cant make statements until a case reaches their court.
Because no major immigration has been brought to the supreme court. they cant just pick something to rule on, their has to be a plaintiff, defendant, i.e. a complaint.
No one is complaining about the current laws. The real question is why hasn't Congress investigated why laws they mandated and funded are not being enforced... Why the 700 miles of fence has not been built, when it was funded in FY06.
it has. it is why illegal children have the legal right to attend school no questions asked. the decision reach in the 70's said no to college and sadlyso many colleges are allowing illegals to study.
go to the us supreme court site and read it yourself
go to www.gpoaccess.gov or www.usa.gov
They have voiced an opinion on illegal immigration and they are directly responsible for our current problems.
Behind truly insane public policy mandates in the United States, you often find the U.S. Supreme Court, willfully misinterpreting the Constitution to reach the political result favored by a majority of the justices.
Many of the Supreme Court’s most overreaching decisions have involved the 14th Amendment. For over 30 years, Justice William Brennan was one of the Court’s most inventive and reliably liberal judicial legislators.
The “constitutional right” of illegal aliens to public schooling at Americans’ expense is one of the many “implied rights” Brennan discovered, hidden deep between the Constitution’s inky lines.
He manufactured this novel entitlement in his opinion for a narrow a 5-4 majority in Plyler v. Doe. Plyler has wreaked havoc on public education (and school finances) ever since.
Plyler was a class action suit brought on behalf of Mexican illegal aliens against the State of Texas, the Texas Education Agency and various Texas school districts. In its finding, the Supreme Court struck down a Texas statute withholding from local school districts any state funds for the education of children who were not legally admitted into the United States.
Justice Brennan airily dismissed the Texas law as having means–denial of school funding for illegal aliens–unrelated to its ends of cost control. With that out of the way, he abandoned altogether the idea that legal admission to the United States, or even American citizenship, should mean anything at all— in favor of a compulsory compassion for the illegal aliens he favors at the expense of the Americans he clearly does not.
What is striking is the presumption that America’s political and cultural heritage is somehow sustained by providing free schooling to multitudes of foreign nationals and that it is Americans’ constitutional duty to guarantee foreigners’ children educational excellence.
Justice Brennan’s final rationale for the majority’s result was the most cynical: the Federal government does next to nothing about removing illegal aliens, so it is tacitly granting them permission to stay.
Without using the phrase, the Supreme Court declared the U.S. a “universal nation,” one with no borders–in effect, no nation at all. The only requirement for full participation in American life is to get here—somehow, anyhow.
The answer to Plyler is political. The 14th Amendment itself says “The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.” Contrary to what most people today believe, the Supreme Court is not the sole interpreter of the Constitution. The Congress can and should pass legislation clarifying that the Equal Protection Clause cannot be construed to compel a state to provide discretionary benefits, including public education, to anyone who is not legally admitted into the United States. The legislation should specify that it is not subject to judicial review.
At one stroke, such a law would overturn Plyler v. Doe— and go a long way toward countering the growing belief that we have no choice but to pretend that illegal aliens are in fact American citizens.
The Immigration information post by website user , MyTend.com not guarantee correctness.
More Immigration Questions and Answers ...