Cesar Munoz: Anchor babies and the Constitution | SummitDaily.com

Cesar Munoz: Anchor babies and the Constitution

That was some “protest” you provided, Mr. Flitcraft, regarding the current interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Remember your high school civics: The Supreme Court has the final say on interpreting the Constitution and establishing case law; and in Plyler v. Doe (1982) the Court said,”No plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment ‘jurisdiction’ can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful.” The case involved a Texas law that was declared unconstitutional for denying funding for education of the children of illegal immigrants.

More importantly, Mr. Flitcraft, don’t be timid and please tell us the real reasons “anchor babies” bother you.

Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism

As a Summit Daily News reader, you make our work possible.

Now more than ever, your financial support is critical to help us keep our communities informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having on our residents and businesses. Every contribution, no matter the size, will make a difference.

Your donation will be used exclusively to support quality, local journalism.


Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.

User Legend: iconModerator iconTrusted User