3_pyler

3_pyler - PYLER 3. Please explain the central arguments of...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
PYLER 3. Please explain the central arguments of the majority opinion in Plyler v. Doe (1982). Please explain the central arguments in the dissenting opinion from that same case. PY the case was between the school district vs undocumented children Barring undocumented children from the schools would save money, but it would "not necessarily" improve the quality of education. - the court noted that under current laws and practices "the illegal alien of today may well be the legal alien of tomorrow" - without an education, undocumented children disadvantaged as a result of poverty, lack of english speaking ability, and undeniable racial prejudices, will become permanently locked into the lowest socio-economic class. District court held that illegal aliens were entitled to the protection of the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. -the state's exclusion of undocumented children from its public schools is the type of state action for which the suspect classification doctrine was designed. - District court concluded that Texas statute violated the Supremacy Clause
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 2

3_pyler - PYLER 3. Please explain the central arguments of...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online