成人X站

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) 鈥� Republican lawmakers in Tennessee have paused a bill meant to challenge the constitutional right for children to attend public schools regardless of their immigration status. Instead, with time waning in the legislative session, they are asking U.S. officials for guidance on whether the bill would jeopardize federal education funding.

The direction announced Monday by House Majority Leader William Lamberth, the bill sponsor, diminishes the chances for the bill to pass this year as lawmakers prepare for a likely adjournment this week. The Tennessee Journal first reported on Lamberth’s decision.

Hundreds of children have packed the Tennessee Capitol this year to oppose the bill that takes aim at the protection established by the landmark 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Plyler v. Doe. That decades-old decision struck down a Texas law that sought to deny enrollment to any student not 鈥渓egally admitted鈥� into the country.

The Republican-controlled Tennessee Senate has already passed a version of the bill, which would require proof of legal residence to enroll in public K-12 public schools and allows schools to either turn away students who fail to provide proper documentation or charge them tuition. The House version, which remains idle in a subcommittee, differs by letting public schools check immigration status, rather than requiring it.

Lamberth noted that Tennessee receives approximately $1.1 billion in federal education money annually.

鈥淲e fully trust the Trump Administration will not withhold federal dollars from our schools due to the passage of House Bill 793/Senate Bill 836,鈥� Lamberth said. 鈥淗owever, out of an abundance of caution, we want to be exceptionally careful before we move forward to ensure no federal taxpayer dollars are at risk.鈥�

A growing number of conservative leaders are pushing states to overturn Plyler v. Doe 鈥� including the conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation. Tennessee鈥檚 Republican lawmakers were among the most aggressive in pursuing the idea that directly contradicts Supreme Court precedent.

Proponents of the bill have largely downplayed denying children the right to education, but instead have focused on the fiscal impact states are facing in educating children residing in the U.S. illegally.

Lawmakers and other conservative supporters repeatedly point to the 5-4 vote that determined Plyler in 1982, arguing that the narrow margin means there’s a better chance the precedent could be overturned by the current Supreme Court. Notably, the court has overturned the right to abortion.