ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page

Advanced search

Immigration Daily


Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network


Chinese Immig. Daily


Connect to us

Make us Homepage



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of free

Immigration LLC.

< Back to current issue of Immigration Daily < Back to current issue of Immigrant's Weekly

Dear Editor:
Somehow people such as Sebastian only look at "fairness" to the illegal immigrant, not fairness to the US citizenry, or to legal immigrants. Why is it "fair" for illegal aliens to ignore our laws and obtain benefits, while would-be legal immigrants wait overseas? Why is it "fair" that Mexico ignores its obligation to provide its own citizenry with even a high school education? I didn't put "Hispanic" in parentheses to highlight a "conspiracy", but rather to emphasize that this board member had an ethnic-based connection with the child a connection which he himself emphasized as a reason for his actions. This child was residing in Mexico and crossed the border legally daily to attend school, using a convenient address to obtain benefits. He was not even an illegal resident of the US, he wasn't "resident" at all. As for the issue of "tax burden", it is up to the people who vote on and pay taxes to decide who should benefit from them. Laws existed in this school district which require residency in the community, a residency which is based on legal guardianship. Many communities are enforcing these laws now because the financial burden of nonresidents is adversely affecting the ability of the districts to provide facilities and faculty for children who are legally entitled to them. There are provisions, such as the payment of tuition, for children who do not reside in the district or even in this country. Some communities on the border even have arrangements with sister-cities in Mexico allowing children to attend school. However, no such arrangements existed in this case. The board member could and should have paid tuition for this child. He was willing, like Sebastian, to say this child should have an education, as long as he, himself, wasn't personally paying for it.

Ali Alexander