Mass. needs to codify education rights for immigrant students
Their courage would lead to the landmark 1982 Supreme Court
Advertisement
I learned the details of this inspiring story while researching my book 'Making Americans: Stories of Historic Struggles, New Ideas, and Inspiration in Immigrant Education.
'
But now some states are challenging some of my students' right to an education. In the past several months,
Advertisement
The court made the right decision in 1982. And it is the right decision now.
It is right because the Constitution is clear: The 14th Amendment guarantees that 'no person' within the country's jurisdiction can be denied 'equal protection of the laws.' The promise extends to all persons, without qualification.
As
Federal District Judge William Justice, who first heard the case in 1977, wrote, denying undocumented students access to education would create a permanent underclass.
Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan Jr., who authored the court's 1982 decision, wrote that denying undocumented students access to education would impose a 'lifetime hardship' that would be harmful to children and to the 'progress of our nation.'
Public school teachers know that immigrant students — regardless of their documentation status — bring extraordinary strengths to our classrooms that benefit all students and their communities.
I hope that the Supreme Court will hold firm on the crucial role of education, even as we see once-sacrosanct rights stripped away. In 2020, the Massachusetts Legislature had the foresight to
Similarly, the Legislature should take proactive steps to protect the right to education for all children in the Commonwealth.
Advertisement
The State House is currently considering a bill that would codify Plyler at the state level as well as current federal provisions and guidance that protect immigrating students with disabilities and ensure immigrant families have access to qualified interpreters when interacting with schools.
Nearly 400 years ago, just three blocks from the state Capitol, Massachusetts opened our country's first public school. We know the vital role education plays for children, for communities, and for the future of the country.
The Legislature should affirm that education is vital for the success of Massachusetts and secure the promise of education for every child in our Commonwealth.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump urges Supreme Court to allow mass layoffs at Education Department
President Donald Trump's administration urged the Supreme Court on Friday to allow officials to gut the Department of Education, a key priority for the president that has been stymied by a series of lower court decisions. The emergency appeal landed at the high court days after the Boston-based 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals declined to reverse a lower court order that halted mass firings at the department, which was created during the Carter administration. Trump has filed more than a dozen emergency appeals at the Supreme Court since he returned to office in January. In its appeal to the Supreme Court, the administration argues its effort at the Education Department involves 'internal management decisions' and 'eliminating discretionary functions that, in the administration's view, are better left to the states.' Though Trump has repeatedly vowed to get rid of the department, the administration's lawyers told the Supreme Court in its filing on Friday that 'the government has been crystal clear in acknowledging that only Congress can eliminate the Department of Education.' Trump ordered mass layoffs at the department earlier this year. The problem for the administration is that the department was created by Congress, and so lower courts have ruled it cannot be unilaterally unwound by the White House. At the same time, the administration does have the power to reduce the size of federal agencies, so long as they can continue to carry out their legal requirements. And that, the Department of Justice told the Supreme Court, is precisely what the administration is attempting to do. 'The Department remains committed to implementing its statutorily mandated functions,' the Department of Justice told the Supreme Court in the appeal. The Education Department is tasked with distributing federal aid to schools, managing federal aid for college students and ensuring compliance with civil rights laws – including ensuring schools accommodate students with disabilities. Most public-school policies are a function of state government. US District Judge Myong Joun, nominated to the bench by former President Joe Biden, indefinitely halted Trump's plans to dismantle the agency and ordered the administration to reinstate employees who had been fired en masse. The ruling came in a lawsuit filed by a teachers' union, school districts, states and education groups. Noting that the department 'cannot be shut down without Congress's approval,' Joun said Trump's planned layoffs 'will likely cripple' it. 'The record abundantly reveals that defendants' true intention is to effectively dismantle the department without an authorizing statute,' he wrote. The Supreme Court is already considering a related emergency case about whether Trump can order mass firings and reorganizations in other federal departments. 'What is at stake in this case,' the 1st Circuit wrote, 'was whether a nearly half-century-old cabinet department would be permitted to carry out its statutorily assigned functions or prevented from doing so by a mass termination of employees aimed at implementing the effective closure of that department.' Trump's order would have affected about half of the department's employees, according to court records.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
In emergency appeal, Trump asks Supreme Court to let him gut Education Department
WASHINGTON − The Trump administration on June 6 asked the Supreme Court to let it dismantle the Education Department and fire hundreds of its workers. President Donald Trump is trying to fulfil his campaign promise to end the Education Department and move school policy to the states. In an emergency appeal, the administration said the court should lift a judge's order blocking Trump from carrying out those moves while they're being challenged by Democratic-led states, school districts and teachers' unions. "The Constitution vests the Executive Branch, not district courts, with the authority to make judgments about how many employees are needed to carry out an agency's statutory functions, and whom they should be," Solicitor General John Sauer told the Supreme Court. U.S. District Judge Myong Joun said the White House's decision to fire more than 1,300 workers in March has prevented the federal government from effectively implementing legally required programs and services. Such changes can't be made without the approval of Congress, which created the department in 1979, Joun ruled. The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals backed that decision. The court said the administration provided no evidence to counter Joun's "record-based findings about the disabling impact" of the mass firings and the transfer of some functions to other agencies. "What is at stake in this case, the District Court found, was whether a nearly half-century-old cabinet department would be permitted to carry out its statutorily assigned functions or prevented from doing so by a mass termination of employees aimed at implementing the effective closure of that department," Judge David Barron wrote for the panel of three circuit judges. An executive order Trump signed in March directed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to "facilitate the closure of the Department of Education." Republicans have long accused the federal government of holding too much power over local and state education policy, even though the federal government has no control over school curriculum. McMahon announced roughly half the agency's workforce would be eliminated through a combination of mass layoffs and voluntary buyouts. That would have reduced the staff from 4,133 workers when Trump began his second term in January to 2,183 workers. The administration also wants the Small Business Administration to take over student loans and move special education services to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. More: Trump can't erase the Education Department with an executive order. Here's why. Joun's order blocked the administration from transferring those functions and required the department to reinstate fired workers. The appeals court said Trump doesn't have to have as many Education Department employees as the previous administration but can't cut so many that the agency can't function as Congress intended. The Justice Department told the Supreme Court that the harms to the government from having to rehire the workers as the litigation continues are greater than any harms the challengers said they'll suffer from diminished department services. More: What will happen at my school if Trump closes the Department of Education? The Education Department is legally required to ensure that students and teachers with disabilities are treated fairly and that low-income schools get the resources they need to keep pace with more affluent ones. The agency also issues regulations for colleges to hold them accountable for preparing graduates for well-paying jobs. And it functions like a giant bank, doling out billions of dollars to help people pay for college. Even if the Education Department were reorganized, which would take an act of Congress, its obligations under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 would have to continue elsewhere. The law passed during the Johnson administration requires the government to administer student loan programs, issue grants and ensure that schools receiving federal money don't discriminate against students. Contributing: Zachary Schermele This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump asks Supreme Court to let him gut Education Department
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Iowa Republican Jim Carlin announces primary campaign against Joni Ernst for US Senate
Iowa Republican Jim Carlin is launching a primary campaign against incumbent Republican U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst, saying the two-term senator has failed to deliver on her famous "make 'em squeal" mantra. 'Joni Ernst said she would go to D.C. and make them squeal,' Carlin said in a statement, referring to a viral campaign ad that helped propel Ernst to her first term in 2014. 'After a decade, it's clear it was a clever campaign commercial, not conviction. Rather than making them squeal, Joni has joined The Swamp." Carlin is a former state senator and trial lawyer who served in the Iowa Legislature from 2017 to 2022. He is the founder of the Iowa Liberty Network, a group focused on "maintaining the liberties endowed by our Creator through getting authentic, constitutional conservatives elected to the state legislature and other public offices," according to its website. Carlin previously mounted a primary campaign against Iowa's other Republican U.S. senator, Chuck Grassley, in 2022. He positioned himself to the right of Grassley, arguing he was more conservative on issues such as immigration and the Second Amendment, and he criticized Grassley for voting to certify the 2020 election in Democrat Joe Biden's favor without pushing to investigate unsubstantiated allegations of fraud. Grassley defeated him 73.5% to 26.5%. "Senator Ernst has a proven record of conservative leadership — cutting waste, securing the border, and making Washington squeal to keep Iowans' hard-earned money in their own pockets," Ernst's campaign manager Bryan Kraber said in a statement. "And she delivers for our families, farmers and veterans. Iowans already saw through Carlin's last failed campaign, and they'll reject his desperate attempt at relevance again in 2026.' Carlin said in a news release that Ernst pledged to serve just two terms in the U.S. Senate when she first ran in 2014, even though she is now seeking a third term. And he said she angered "America First conservatives" with her reluctance to support Republican President Donald Trump's pick to lead the U.S. Department of Defense, Pete Hegseth. Ernst ignited a firestorm among Republicans by withholding her support for Hegseth initially, although she ultimately voted to confirm him. Carlin also pointed to Ernst's 2022 vote for the Respect for Marriage Act, which garnered intense pushback from some Iowa Republicans. At least 17 county parties voted to condemn or censure Ernst over the vote. 'Iowans deserve a voice in Washington, D.C., who actually listens to them and represents them — not big donors and special interests,' he said. 'More than that, Iowans deserve someone who genuinely cares about them and will work to make their lives better. There are enough self-serving establishment politicians in Washington. President Donald J. Trump needs America First allies, not adversaries.' Ernst has not formally announced her reelection effort, but she has hired a campaign manager and scheduled her annual Roast and Ride fundraiser for the fall. One other Republican challenger, Joshua Smith, has announced a campaign against Ernst for the GOP nomination. And two Democrats have formally entered the race: Knoxville Chamber of Commerce director Nathan Sage and State Rep. J.D. Scholten of Sioux City. State Sen. Zach Wahls, D-Coralville, and state Rep. Josh Turek, D-Council Bluffs, have also previously said they are considering running. Brianne Pfannenstiel is the chief politics reporter for the Des Moines Register. Reach her at bpfann@ or 515-284-8244. Follow her on X at @brianneDMR. This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: Joni Ernst gets primary challenge from Iowa Republican Jim Carlin
