logo
Tennessee Senate wants to kick undocumented kids out of school

Tennessee Senate wants to kick undocumented kids out of school

Yahoo18-04-2025

It's fundamentally cruel to turn away children from public schools based on their immigration status, but the Tennessee Senate advanced a bill that would let its schools do just that. State Sen. Bo Watson has argued that his legislation is about easing financial pressure on school districts, but the bill is more about scapegoating immigrant communities and forcing needless suffering upon their kids.
'Our education system has limited resources, which should be prioritized for students who are legally present in the country,' Watson said earlier this year. Referring to local education agencies, he said, 'An influx of illegal immigration can strain LEAs and put significant pressure on their budgets.' He said his bill empowers local governments to manage their resources more effectively and 'builds upon the legislative action taken during the special session to address illegal immigration at the local level.'
The bill that the Tennessee Senate passed is a direct challenge to Plyler v. Doe, the 1982 Supreme Court ruling that stopped Texas' plan to let local school districts either deny admission to undocumented schoolchildren or charge them tuition. In a 5-4 ruling, the court said the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause means that all children in this country have access to public education. Justice William J. Brennan Jr. noted in the majority opinion that the provisions of the equal protection clause are 'universal in their application, to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction, without regard to any differences of race, color, or nationality.'
Plyler v. Doe made clear that these protections apply to all 'people' within the United States, not just citizens. This principle has been central to the law for more than four decades and has prevented states from using immigration status to deprive children of their right to attend public school.
But, as you might imagine, the battle over Plyler v. Doe has never truly ended. Republican lawmakers and conservative legal groups have repeatedly pushed to overturn it and dismantle the protections it provides. For them, erasing Plyler is not just about reversing a single Supreme Court case; it's also about stripping away a core pillar of the 14th Amendment's promise. Similar bills have been proposed in Texas and Oklahoma.
Tennessee's bill has now been moved to its lower chamber, and immigrant communities across the state are fighting to stop it from becoming law. Lisa Sherman Luna, the executive director of the Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition, told me in an email: 'Even in the face of unrelenting attacks on their humanity, immigrant families have responded to this latest threat to their children's futures with power, not panic.' She said, 'Tennesseans across race, class, and immigration status recognize the harm these policies would have not only on the children of our state but the entire nation, and have been calling their lawmakers, showing up in committees, and organizing actions in districts to make sure their voices were heard.'
Local parents and educators have also been vocal in their opposition. 'I am Latino. My kids have Latino names. And while this bill is targeted directly towards immigrants, it's primarily, in my opinion, targeted towards the Latino community.' Hamilton County teacher Kyle Carrasco said. 'So I fear, just in general, that they'll have to kind of negotiate some of these stigmas.'
'Unchecked illegal migration over the past three years has possibly cost the public education system billions of dollars,' according to a 2024 post from the Heritage Foundation. 'Large influxes of non-English-speaking children also have a negative effect on the classroom. Not only must the federal government secure the border and prevent illegal migration, but states can, and must, also take action.'
What Watson and the Heritage Foundation don't acknowledge is the undeniable human cost of kicking children out of schools. And the cost to the United States if we normalize the idea that the circumstances of their birth define children's worth. Kica Matos, president of the National Immigration Law Center, said in an email that, 'We're seeing a groundswell of opposition to this extreme bill, and we're going to keep fighting to make sure it doesn't pass. But if it does, we're ready to respond accordingly.'
A fundamental promise of the 14th Amendment is that all people will be afforded equal protection under the law. That's what's at stake here. It's not the only place it's at stake, obviously, but in this case, conservatives — and not for the first time — are seeking to block the schoolhouse doors to children.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Arkansas Supreme Court releases proposed rule for artificial intelligence
Arkansas Supreme Court releases proposed rule for artificial intelligence

Yahoo

time29 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Arkansas Supreme Court releases proposed rule for artificial intelligence

The Arkansas Supreme Court building in Little Rock. (John Sykes/Arkansas Advocate) The use of artificial intelligence in legal documents could violate Arkansas law or court rules, according to a proposed administrative order issued by the state Supreme Court last week. Specifically, the proposed order addresses the use of confidential court data with generative artificial intelligence. AI models retain data inputted by users of AI products, such as ChatGPT, in order to continue training the large language models that exploded into public use only a few years ago, the order notes. 'Anyone who either intentionally or inadvertantly [sic] discloses confidential or sealed information related to a client or case [to a generative AI model] may be violating established rules,' the proposed order reads, specifically citing Arkansas Supreme Court Administrative Order Number 19, the Arkansas Rules of Professional Conduct and the Arkansas Code of Judicial Conduct. Additionally, the proposed order prohibits anyone with internal access to the state's court system, CourtConnect, from 'intentionally exposing our state courts' internal data to a GAI.' The proposed order provides an exemption to this prohibition if approval is granted by the Supreme Court's Automation Committee to engage in 'a research and analysis project related to the use of generative AI tools and general AI for the benefit of our courts.' The proposed order does not appear to address questions of broader use of AI by attorneys within the state court system. Judges in courtrooms across the country in recent months have expressed frustration with attorneys who have filed briefs and other documents bearing citations to nonexistent or irrelevant cases as a result of so-called 'AI hallucinations,' leading to sanctions in some cases. As reported by the Alabama Reflector, for example, lawyers who were being paid millions by the Alabama Department of Corrections to defend it against lawsuits filed by prisoners in the state system were called out by an inmate's attorneys for making up legal citations 'out of whole cloth' in a lawsuit where their client alleged being stabbed repeatedly while in restraints. The federal judge presiding over the case said that the incident showed that sanctions levied by other courts had proven 'insufficient' to deter lawyers from filing documents with improper or made up citations created by AI. 'That causes me to consider a fuller range of sanctions,' Judge Anna M. Manasco said. The Arkansas Supreme Court Committee on Automation created a subcommittee to 'study the use of AI in the courts.' The introduction to the proposed order notes that as the committee continues its work, it will make recommendations. The comment period for the proposed administrative order ends on Aug. 1. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Trump administration urges court not to dismiss case against Wisconsin judge
Trump administration urges court not to dismiss case against Wisconsin judge

Yahoo

time29 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump administration urges court not to dismiss case against Wisconsin judge

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The Trump administration argued Monday that charges should not be dropped against a Wisconsin judge who was indicted for allegedly helping a man who is in the country evade U.S. immigration agents seeking to arrest him in her courthouse. Attorneys for the U.S. Department of Justice urged a federal judge to reject a motion filed by Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan seeking to dismiss the charges against her, saying doing so would be 'unprecedented" and allow judges to be above the law. Dugan faces a July 21 trial in the case that escalated a clash between Trump's administration and opponents over the Republican president's sweeping immigration crackdown. Trump critics contend that Dugan's arrest went too far and that the administration is trying to make an example out of her to discourage judicial opposition to the crackdown. The accusations against Dugan Dugan is charged with concealing an individual to prevent arrest, a misdemeanor, and obstruction, which is a felony. Prosecutors say she escorted Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, 31, and his lawyer out of her courtroom through a back door on April 18 after learning that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were in the courthouse seeking to arrest him for being in the country illegally. She could face up to six years in prison and a $350,000 fine if convicted on both counts. Her attorneys say she's innocent. They filed a motion last month to dismiss the case, saying she was acting in her official capacity as a judge and therefore is immune to prosecution. They also maintain that the federal government violated Wisconsin's sovereignty by disrupting a state courtroom and prosecuting a state judge. Trump administration response Justice Department attorneys responded in a court filing Monday, saying dismissing the charges against the judge on the grounds that she is immune would be unprecedented and would ignore 'well-established law that has long permitted judges to be prosecuted for crimes they commit.' 'Such a ruling would give state court judges carte blanche to interfere with valid law enforcement actions by federal agents in public hallways of a courthouse, and perhaps even beyond,' Justice Department attorneys argued. 'Dugan's desired ruling would, in essence, say that judges are 'above the law,' and uniquely entitled to interfere with federal law enforcement.' Dugan's attorney, Craig Mastantuono, did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment. In her motion to dismiss, Dugan argued that her conduct amounted to directing people's movement in and around her courtroom, and that she enjoys legal immunity for official acts she performs as a judge. She also accused the federal government of violating Wisconsin's sovereignty by disrupting a state courtroom and prosecuting a state judge. Dugan's case is similar to one brought during the first Trump administration against a Massachusetts judge, who was accused of helping a man sneak out a courthouse back door to evade a waiting immigration enforcement agent. That case was eventually dismissed. The case background According to prosecutors, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz illegally reentered the U.S. after being deported in 2013. He was charged in March with misdemeanor domestic violence in Milwaukee County and was in Dugan's courtroom for a hearing in that case on April 18. Dugan's clerk alerted her that immigration agents were in the courthouse looking to arrest Flores-Ruiz, prosecutors allege in court documents. According to an affidavit, Dugan became visibly angry at the agents' arrival and called the situation 'absurd.' After discussing the warrant for Flores-Ruiz's arrest with the agents, Dugan demanded that they speak with the chief judge and led them away from the courtroom. She then returned to the courtroom, was heard saying something to the effect of 'wait, come with me,' and then showed Flores-Ruiz and his attorney out a back door, the affidavit says. The immigration agents eventually detained Flores-Ruiz outside the building following a foot chase. Dugan, 66, was arrested by the FBI on April 25 at the courthouse. A grand jury indicted Dugan on May 13 and she pleaded not guilty on May 15. Dugan defense fund A legal defense fund created by Dugan supporters to help pay for her high-profile defense attorneys has raised more than $137,000 in three weeks from more than 2,800 donors. Her legal team includes former U.S. Attorney Steve Biskupic and former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement. Both were appointed by Republican presidents. She has also hired prominent attorneys in Milwaukee and Madison. 'This is an impressive show of support for the defense fund, highlighting that the public believes in protecting a fair and independent judiciary,' former Supreme Court Justice Janine Geske, the fund's trustee, said Monday. 'The fund will continue to raise grassroots donations and uphold strict guidelines to ensure transparency and accountability.' Dugan is not required to list the donor names until she submits her annual financial disclosure form, which is due in April. Numerous people are prohibited from donating, including Milwaukee County residents; attorneys who practice in the county; lobbyists; judges; parties with pending matters before any Milwaukee County judge; and county employees.

Colorado Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen resigns to take national position
Colorado Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen resigns to take national position

Yahoo

time29 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Colorado Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen resigns to take national position

DNEVER (KDVR) — Colorado Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen has resigned from the Colorado Senate, the senator's office announced Monday morning. His resignation was effective Monday, June 9, as he heads to the American Excellence Foundation, a national investment nonprofit focused on supporting conservative causes where he will be the next president and CEO. The organization's board unanimously approved of Lundeen in the position. 11 Colorado companies named among top workplaces in nation: US News The Republican leader has been in Colorado's Senate for seven sessions and served as minority leader since 2022. He also served in the Colorado House of Representatives four sessions and four years on the Colorado State Board of Education. 'Serving Colorado has been an honor and blessing,' Lundeen said in a press release. 'I am grateful to the people of Senate District 9 for the opportunity to fight for policies that empower individuals, protect our communities, and promote prosperity. As I transition to a national platform, I am eager to continue advocating for personal freedom, economic opportunity, and common-sense conservative values.' According to a press release, Lundeen's achievements in Colorado's General Assembly include co-leading an effort to rewrite Colorado's public education funding formula, playing a key role in successfully cutting the state income tax rate, and sponsoring bills that have since become law to combat human trafficking. Colorado Senate Republicans in a statement congratulated Lundeen for his next steps. 'We are grateful for his many years of dedicated public service and thank him for his leadership over the years fighting for students, economic freedom, and safety for all Coloradans,' the statement read. 'We wish him well and are excited to see him succeed in his next endeavor.' The Senate Republican Caucus will hold a meeting on Thursday to elect its new minority leader. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store