Good for you, Bridget! This is her MO - she tries to get everyone else to do her work for her!

However, I do know several Mexican citizens as well as Americans who have lived legally in Mexico with their school aged children … they may be of some help on the subject … but it could take me several days to find out. Better yet, you could do your own fact checking - by calling the Mexican Embassy. Not sure why you care one way or the other … as you said, we are not in Mexico. They can do as they like with their schools policies.

The issue is illegal aliens from Mexico - as well as other foreign nations - who we the U.S. taxpayers are forced to support.

I did not state that I would prefer school districts flout the law by banning the children of illegal aliens …currently public schools aren’t allowed to refuse illegals becouse of Plyler vs Doe and would be in a world of hurt if they tried to:

http://www.vdare.com/sutherland/taxpayer_expense.htm

All very bizarre when you consider that U.S. immigration laws are so often left unenforced … and that Plyler basically calls for schools to aid and abet illegal aliens. I would prefer placing donkey before cart action …Overturn Plyler first.

All very interesting when you consider the amount of dust that is kicked up each and every time a locality attempts to end spending tax dollars on illegal aliens. The same folks who pushed Plyler all the way to the Supreme Court are frantic to put out municipal brush fires… The last thing they want is for Plyler to be challenged. For them, Plyler was never simply about allowing little Julio the right to enroll in school.

Plyler is not settled law, and can never stand as settled law, as it has no sound basis in the 14th Amendment - it’s purported foundation. It is due for another visit.

http://federalistblog.us/2008/03/supreme_fraud_plyler_v_doe.html

It appears different countries have different practices on this.

Johnson made a blanket statement about tuition being required in Mexico’s public schools, not private schools, and not with any qualifications on what grade levels. It has nothing to do with “gotcha” Ms. Palin. Things stated that are in error should be corrected.

I don’t know the answer to your question regarding the children of illegal immigrants in Mexico. I would assume not. However we are not in Mexico and I am not sure why you want to imitate them in public policy. In the United States, the Supreme Court has ruled on this matter and unless that ruling is reversed it is unlikely that school districts across the US will do what you would prefer and ban all children of illegal immigrants from attending for free.

While factchecker plays “gotcha” over the mute tuition issue …Mexico has both public and private schools - and a variety of PS fees charged to parents for text books and compulsory uniforms when children reach upper grade levels.

Mexican nationals need documents to enroll their childrenin Mexican schools:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,409221,00.html

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Mexican-Law-1642/2008/2/apostille-birth-certificate-still-2.htm

And I love this line: “…more needs to be done in the United States to prepare returning migrants…” Thats great. One more service we will be forced to fund.

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/shared/news/stories/2008/09/MEXICO_RETURNKIDS05_AUS.html

Perhaps factchecker can answer this: If an American “undocumented migrant” has a school aged child in Mexico, can that child be enrolled in a Mexican public school without proper documentation? Are their laws on the books that make said child eligible for a tax funded education in Mexico? Do you think the Mexican citizenry should shoulder the burden of educating illegal aliens in their nation?

As to the question “How can we get his done?”:

http://www.vdare.com/sutherland/the_solution.htm

Yay!

Primary education is free and compulsory for children in Mexican states from age 6 to age 14. Compulsory education used to end at the 6th grade, but was extended to 9th grade in 1992.

Can you explain/support your statement?

How can we get this done?

Such information is needed to “bill” the federal government for its failure to enforce its immigration laws, and the SCOTUS requirement that local jurisdictions enroll violators of those laws in their schools.

The foreign-born population is tracked not only in total number, but in the ratio of male to female. As the foreign-born population is reported to have decreased by over 14%, the proportion of males within this population changed from 47% to 53%. When you work the numbers, this represents a decrease of 1,022 foreign-born males and a decrease of 2,421 females.

Among the illegal alien population in the U.S., males heavily over-represent the population to the extent that in some places in Mexico, males account for only 40% of the population. So how were there more foreign-born women than men here in 2006? Where could they have come from? And now that the statistics seem to conform to reality a bit better, does that suggest that in their home countries, the returning illegal alien population is driving this demographic imbalance even higher?

I can’t believe the Census published this garbage. Anyone worth their salt would have pulled this back and fixed the problems rather than put out such ridiculous numbers.