{"title":"鲍威尔法官会怎么做?“外籍儿童”案及其平等保护的意义","authors":"L. Greenhouse","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1803609","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The current immigration debate adds renewed relevance to the Supreme Court's 1982 decision in Plyler v. Doe, holding that a state that provided a free public education to any child had to provide it to all children, including undocumented immigrants. Justice Brennan wrote for a 5-4 Court, with the full, if seemingly unlikely, concurrence of his conservative colleague, Lewis F. Powell Jr. This article tells the back story of how these two very different Justices came to agreement in this important case.","PeriodicalId":81001,"journal":{"name":"Constitutional commentary","volume":"25 1","pages":"29-50"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What Would Justice Powell Do? The 'Alien Children' Case and the Meaning of Equal Protection\",\"authors\":\"L. Greenhouse\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.1803609\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The current immigration debate adds renewed relevance to the Supreme Court's 1982 decision in Plyler v. Doe, holding that a state that provided a free public education to any child had to provide it to all children, including undocumented immigrants. Justice Brennan wrote for a 5-4 Court, with the full, if seemingly unlikely, concurrence of his conservative colleague, Lewis F. Powell Jr. This article tells the back story of how these two very different Justices came to agreement in this important case.\",\"PeriodicalId\":81001,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Constitutional commentary\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"29-50\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-01-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Constitutional commentary\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1803609\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Constitutional commentary","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1803609","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
目前关于移民问题的辩论与1982年最高法院在普莱勒诉多伊案(Plyler v. Doe)中作出的裁决有新的关联。该裁决认为,一个向任何儿童提供免费公共教育的州,必须向所有儿童提供免费公共教育,包括非法移民。布伦南大法官为5票赞成、4票反对的最高法院做出裁决,他的保守派同事小刘易斯·f·鲍威尔(Lewis F. Powell Jr.)虽然看似不太可能,但完全同意。本文讲述了这两位截然不同的大法官如何在这个重要案件中达成一致的背景故事。
What Would Justice Powell Do? The 'Alien Children' Case and the Meaning of Equal Protection
The current immigration debate adds renewed relevance to the Supreme Court's 1982 decision in Plyler v. Doe, holding that a state that provided a free public education to any child had to provide it to all children, including undocumented immigrants. Justice Brennan wrote for a 5-4 Court, with the full, if seemingly unlikely, concurrence of his conservative colleague, Lewis F. Powell Jr. This article tells the back story of how these two very different Justices came to agreement in this important case.