NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Damien Felipe Zimenez has many dreams about his future. He can be a restaurant owner, a scientist, or something else. As he works throughout the sixth grade, he knows that education is important in realizing his dreams, but he is increasingly worried that options could disappear soon for some of his classmates.
Felipe Zimenez is one of hundreds of children who crammed the Tennessee Capitol this year to oppose laws designed to overturn long-standing US constitutional rights to free public education for children, regardless of immigration circumstances. This is the protection established by a 1982 US Supreme Court decision Plylerv. Doesought to break Texas laws and refuse to register as a student “not legally recognized” by the state.
“I am the son of immigrant parents who have shown me that I respect and cherish everyone,” Felipe Zimenez told lawmakers earlier this year, representing the impact the bill will have on his peers. “Like me and all the children in this country, we have the right to dream and make dreams come true. Because of the status of immigration, the right to education should not be taken away from us.”
The number of conservative leaders is growing, including the conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation. This year, Republican lawmakers in Tennessee would like to take up that cause by directly contradicting the Supreme Court’s decision and by bringing up laws that not only lead to supporters going to the High Court, but also to bring legislation that will cause legal battles that judges want to overturn the verdict.
The GOP-led state introduced the anti-immigrant anti-immigration bill after President Donald Trump’s reelection and after him. Subsequent movements Actively deports immigrants who have illegally entered the United States. However, few people came out of the committee as they followed the Tennessee lead, focusing on revoking public education from children.
It’s a difficult battle, but another Supreme Court
The Republican-controlled Tennessee Senate approves a proposal that requires enrollment in public K-12 public schools in legal residence evidence, allowing schools to fail to provide appropriate documents or charge tuition fees. The house version depends on having public schools check immigrant status rather than asking for immigrant status.
The two versions need to be reconciliated before heading to Republican Bill Lee’s desk. If it passes, the law is almost certain to face a lawsuit.
Sponsors of the proposal have largely downplayed children’s denial of their right to education, but instead focuses on the financial implications they face in educating children who live illegally in the United States.
“It is allegedly claimed that undocumented, illegal foreigners pay sales and property taxes,” said Republican Sen. Bo Watson, a supporter of the Senate bill. “It’s true, but I don’t know if these payments are close to offsetting additional costs. We argue that it’s not.”
It is unclear how many undocumented children live in Tennessee, and it is unclear whether the proposal will bring savings. When Texas had a similar economic argument in the case of Pryler, it was rejected by the court.
Lawmakers and other conservative supporters repeatedly point out the 5-4 votes that decided on Pryler in 1982. Abortion rights.
“We’ve seen a lot of effort and we’ve seen you in a lot of ways,” said Brett Gaier, an education leader at West Michigan University. “And where does it come from? It starts in the state.”
The first test for the Priler decision was held in California in 1994. Voters there approved a proposal banning immigration within the country without legal approval to receive public health, education or other social services. The law has been overturned.
Pryler’s precedent was once again challenged in 2011 after Alabama legislators demanded that schools determine student immigration status. The law was ultimately blocked after a legal challenge brought a settlement.
“We don’t see any real debate about this, we see symbolic measures supported by several groups of Republican lawmakers,” said Thomas Senz, of the law firm’s Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund, successfully defending the plaintiff before the Supreme Court in the Pryler case.
“They have been having the same old debate about cost burdens and more since the 1970s,” Saenz added. “They never balance it with the benefits of taxes paid by these children and their parents.”
For children, the fight changes personally
Just as GOP lawmakers have defended the law, the tone of those who appeared to fight the bill for months became often emotional. Students are shed tears, distraught that their classmates are being taken out of school, and worried about who will be next.
As the Senate voted earlier this month, 12-year-old Sylvestore Correa del Kant stood outside on the crowded second floor of the Capitol with his mother, and realized that the law could hurt children who live where they could affect their lives for years.
His family brought him to Nashville when he was three years old, from Santiago, Chile. He currently attends a public middle school, originally a segregated school for African Americans. He tied that legacy to Tennessee law.
“We feel like we’ve reconnected and done a lot to go to school with people,” said sixth grade Correa del Kant. “And I think it’s like it’s just a step back, just going back in time and losing everything we’ve worked for.”
___
Associated Press writer David Reeve was a contribution from Jefferson City, Missouri.
Source link
