Easley's defiance on illegal alien issue is reckless and irresponsible
Update, 5:08 p.m. Friday: The feds totally contradict the N.C. AG's Office, The N&O of Raleigh reports.
Very weird.
My apologies to Gov. Easley and his staff.
end of update
Gov. Mike Easley is reckless and irresponsible to defy advice from the N.C. Attorney General's Office that state community colleges should not admit illegal aliens as students.
The State Board of Community Colleges last year issued a guidance memoradum instructing local community colleges to "immediately begin admitting undocumented individuals" consistent with its policy that, "Each college shall maintain an open door admission to all applicants who are high school graduates or who are at least 18 years of age." State law gives the State Board of Community Colleges the authority to establish admission criteria.
But that's not the end of the story. In an advisory letter dated May 6 to Shante Martin, general counsel for the N.C. Community College System, N.C. Department of Justice General Counsel JB Kelly writes:
"The admission criteria and its application should be interpreted in a manner consistent with other applicable state and federal laws on college admissions."
To wit:
"Federal law makes certain non-citizens inelgible for State and local public benefits. State and local public benefits are defined under federal law for purposes of this prohibition. That definition includes 'postsecondary education.' ...
"Prohibited State and local public benefits can be provided 'only through the enactment of a State law ... which affirmatively provides for such eligibility.' ... State law may provide eligibility for postsecondary education benefits to an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States only to the extent any citizen or national of the United States receives the same eligibility regardless of State residence. North Carolina has not enacted such laws."
This affirms a complaint often voiced: Why should an illegal alien receive benefits, such as admission or taxpayer-subsidized tuition, at a North Carolina public community college (or university, for that matter) while a U.S. citizen who happens to live in, say, Virginia is denied the same benefit? Well, according to General Counsel Kelly, he can't unless state law specifically creates that benefit.
Kelly notes some "unsettled" aspects of the "scope and applicability of the Federal prohibition" and volunteers to seek clarification from Washington. Before such clarification is provided, and until some state law is enacted, Kelly adds, prudence calls for a halt to the admission of undocumented aliens. That careful course "would more likely withstand judicial scrutiny."
That makes perfect sense, except apparently to Easley. Don't pay any attention to those legalities, he says, urging community colleges to offer admission with no questions asked.
At this point, let me say there's a rational case to be made that illegal immigrants who earn North Carolina high school diplomas and qualify for higher education should be allowed to enroll in community colleges. If they're going to live in North Carolina anyway, why not help them build better lives for themselves and their families?
But what seems like a good idea is far different from what the law says is allowed. We can't simply decide to ignore the law just because we don't like it or think it's unfair.
The governor, who takes an oath to uphold the law, should be the last one to say it ought to be ignored.
Easley might think he understands the law better than does the Attorney General's Office. After all, he's a former attorney general himself. But the responsible thing to do in such a case is to wait until a definitive judgment is made.
Kelly all but says the state is inviting a lawsuit challenging its policy of admitting illegal aliens and that it's likely to lose. Easley should not put the state in a precarious legal position by ignoring the good advice of the office charged with keeping the state on the right side of the law. That's simply reckless.
Addendum: Gubernatorial candidate Bev Perdue disagrees with Easley. Pat McCrory opposes in-state tuition for illegal immigrants.
Comments (8)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Easley has a long track record of thumbing his nose at the law and the will of the people. As you know, he shoved the lottery down everyone's throats through so
Plus, he gutted the authority of the State Superintendent of Education when the voters dared reject his hand-picked candidate. I'm surprised this story hasn't gotten more attention, but Easley reduced the state superintendent to a largely ceremonial position after the 2004 election didn't go his way.
And then there's simply the fact that giving tuition breaks to illegal aliens is a slap in the face to law-abiding American citizens.
The thought that a citizen of Mexico who enters this state illegally would get preferential treatment over an American who lives in Virginia or South Carolina is flat-out wrong.
Posted on May 9, 2008 11:26 AM
Easley's final year in office is turning into a disaster. Way to leave a legacy.
Posted on May 9, 2008 12:02 PM
Hey, Lets not forget a couple of the Dems wanna make some Community College "free" also. Never mind Im already looking at THOUSANDS for my kids to go to In state 4 years now I may have to pay for 2 more years of public edumacation.
Easley's a dumb$#@ and he is proving it more and more of late.
Posted on May 9, 2008 12:34 PM
Whoops. Feds say there's no federal law preventing colleges from enrolling undocumented immigrants:
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1066974.html
Posted on May 9, 2008 5:06 PM
Wow.
Thanks, Jonathan. I've updated my post.
It will be interesting to see Cooper's explanation for this, uh, misunderstanding.
Posted on May 9, 2008 5:13 PM
I am confused.
Illegal immigrants are in the country, well, illegally, but its not a violation of the law for them to be admitted to colleges and universities and pay less than American citizens from other states? Only in Washington could this not be a problem.
I am thinking that this may be yet another reason why people are skeptical of government's ability to do much of anything.
Posted on May 9, 2008 5:47 PM
Paul,
This debate is about admissions and access, not tuition benefits.
Immigrants who do not have a lawful visa are not getting an in-state tuition rate. They pay the same out-of-state rate that our friends from Virginia or South Carolina or wherever pay when they want to come to college here.
That means, in theory at least, the state is not spending money to educate them. Rather the immigrants are paying the state to be educated. Out-of-state tuition rates are supposed to be high enough that they actually make money for the college. You can make an argument about the money spent for facilities not being covered by tuition -- but we'd need those anyway to educate our own residents.
And we're not talking about a large number of students when we look at immigrants without visas. It's less than 400 in our colleges and universities out of 400,000 students.
http://www.newsobserver.com/1154/story/1066519.html
Doug, I'll be curious to see what the AG has to say as well. It's discomforting to see our state's top lawyer make what appears to be a pretty big blunder .
Posted on May 9, 2008 6:47 PM
Jonathon:
Thanks for being on top of this issue. I understand your point about access and that you are talking only about North Carolina, but the point I was trying to make is more general:
We have millions in the US here illegally, and they are entitled to benefits nonetheless.
With regard to in-state tuition, there are about ten states that do offer it to illegal immigrants and the movement is growing. There are 16 more states considering in-state tuition for illegal immigrants, including North Carolina. Interestingly, by federal law if a state offers in-state tuition to illegals they are required to offer it to all U.S. citizens, including those from out-of-state. Those states that do offer in-state tuition to illegal immigrants, however, do not follow the law and do not give the same break to U.S. citizens.
The costs of illegal immigration are everywhere, and easy to see. Scores of public hospitals have closed in southern California because they cannot afford to remain open given the flood of poor immigrants that they must, by law, treat in their emergency rooms. The list goes on and on.
Let me tell you about my own experience with U.S. Immigration and Customs. My wife and I returned from a short trip overseas. Before getting off the aircraft in Philadelphia, however, we were required to fill out a declaration form for customs. Once we got off the plane we had to stand in a long line to clear immigration, and then another to clear customs. I remember thinking to myself, here I am, born in the U.S., an honorably discharged veteran, and I am subject to a higher level of scrutiny than are millions who stream across our borders from Mexico illegally. Riddle me that Batman!
It is not even a close question when it comes to public opinion; people want our borders protected and the influx of illegal immigrants to stop. We saw this a couple of times last year when the public shot down to attempts by McCain and others to give us "comprehensive immigration reform" that included amnesty for those already here. Unfortunately, it appears that our legislators, both democrat and republican, don't really care what we think.
(Hope I didn't get to far off-track).
Posted on May 10, 2008 10:40 AM