How the Supreme Court can shut off the left’s migrant-to-school pipeline



The National Education Association, America’s largest teachers' union, held its annual convention earlier this month. The union’s resolutions — leaked to me by a union member — had nothing to do with improving education. Instead, the NEA declared war on the Trump administration.

One resolution committed the union to “defend birthright citizenship,” and another one to “support students’ right to organize against ICE raids and deportations.” Yet another declared support for “the mass democratic movement against Trump’s authoritarianism” and “the Los Angeles-based movement to defeat Trump’s attempt to use federal forces against the state of California and other states and communities.”

Forcing taxpayers to fund education for illegal immigrants undermines the rule of law and creates perverse incentives for further illegal immigration.

These resolutions confirm yet again that teachers’ unions are more invested in political activism than in prioritizing education.

In fact, NEA President Becky Pringle is an at-large member of the Democratic National Committee. Such actions expose teachers’ unions for what they really are: little more than an arm of the Democratic Party, pushing a radical agenda that puts taxpayers on the hook for funding the K-12 education of illegal immigrants.

With a conservative-leaning Supreme Court and growing public support for immigration enforcement, the time has come to revisit Plyler v. Doe, the 1982 ruling that forced states to provide free public education to children regardless of their immigration status. Reversing that decision would restore basic fairness for taxpayers and bring education policy back in line with the will of the American people.

The post-Plyler disaster

The court decided Plyler v. Doe on a narrow 5-4 vote, reflecting deep division even at the time. Today’s court, reshaped by President Trump’s appointments, has a stronger constitutional foundation to strike it down. The legal terrain has shifted. The original ruling was shaky then and looks even weaker now.

Legally, the case for overturning Plyler is strong. Conservative scholars argue that the 43-year-old ruling overstepped federal authority by compelling states to allocate resources for individuals who are not lawfully present. States have a sovereign right to prioritize their citizens and legal residents when allocating finite resources.

Meanwhile, conservative legal scholars argue that the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment — used to justify the decision — does not require states to educate those in the country unlawfully. That clause was written to protect citizens and lawful residents, not to extend taxpayer-funded benefits to those who violate immigration law.

RELATED: School censorship backfires in costly free speech beatdown

  z_wei via iStock/Getty Images

Forcing taxpayers to foot the bill for illegal immigrants’ education undermines the rule of law and encourages more unlawful entry. Public sentiment aligns with this view. A June CBS News/YouGov survey found that 54% of Americans support President Trump’s deportation efforts, a stance that helped propel him back to the White House last year. A June InsiderAdvantage poll found that 59% of Americans — including 89% of Republicans — support Trump’s decision “to deploy National Guard and federal military in downtown Los Angeles.”

A 2013 Phi Delta Kappa International/Gallup poll revealed that 55% of Americans oppose using taxpayer dollars to fund education for children of illegal immigrants, with a staggering 81% of Republican voters in agreement. (Perhaps that’s why Gallup hasn’t asked the question again.)

Taxpayers bear the cost, but teachers’ unions reap the rewards.

Public school funding is tied to enrollment. More students — regardless of legal status — mean more money for school districts. Illegal immigrant students often qualify as English language learners, which brings in even more per-pupil funding through federal and state grants.

The surge in English learners creates a demand for specialized teachers. Hiring more staff means more union members — and more dues. The unions grow stronger and richer with every new student who requires extra services.

So when teachers’ unions protest immigration enforcement or attack Trump administration policies, they aren’t defending children. They’re protecting their bottom line. It’s all about the cash, not compassion. They’ve prioritized financial and political power over the interests of American citizens and legal residents, and they expect you to keep paying for it.

Two ways forward

Two strategies could pave the way to overturn Plyler v. Doe.

First, states like Texas, Oklahoma, and Tennessee are expanding school choice programs that exclude illegal immigrants from taxpayer-funded benefits such as private school scholarships and education savings accounts. These programs give parents greater control over their children’s education, but unions have launched aggressive campaigns to block them.

If unions sue to stop these programs on the grounds that they violate Plyler, they’ll likely lose. The ruling required states to provide free public education to illegal immigrants. It said nothing about private scholarships or alternative funding streams.

That legal distinction matters. The court’s conservative majority could uphold these state programs and clarify that Plyler doesn’t apply outside the public school system. Such a decision wouldn’t just protect school choice — it could also erode the Plyler precedent and clear a path to overturn it entirely.

That would return power to the states and allow elected leaders — not unelected judges — to decide how taxpayer dollars are spent.

The second way involves red-state lawmakers taking direct aim at Plyler.

Republican legislators in states like Tennessee have introduced bills to block taxpayer funding for the K-12 education of illegal immigrants. Tennessee recently put its bill on hold while seeking federal guidance on whether the move would jeopardize broader education funding.

If teachers’ unions sue to stop these laws, they risk a high-stakes loss.

A legal defeat could weaken Plyler and give states new authority to draw clear lines around who qualifies for taxpayer-funded education. One ruling could reshape national policy — and force a long-overdue debate about who pays, who benefits, and who decides.

The National Education Association’s unhinged resolutions reflect a desperate push to preserve a broken status quo. Its opposition to border enforcement isn’t about students — it’s about protecting funding, growing membership, and consolidating power. The Supreme Court should revisit Plyler v. Doe and reaffirm a basic principle: Taxpayer resources must serve those who respect the rule of law.

Report: Biden Gave ‘Millions’ In Tax Dollars To ‘Soros-Backed NGO,’ Group Pushing Men In Women’s Prisons

'The American people overwhelmingly rejected these soft-on-crime, defund-the-police policies in the last election because they undermined the safety and security of their communities.'

Biden’s bureaucrats scramble to protect their taxpayer slush fund



Democrats love to preach about “fiscal responsibility” — but only when it involves raising taxes. The moment someone suggests cutting waste, fraud, and abuse in the federal government, they panic like a cornered animal. That’s exactly what’s happening now with the Department of Government Efficiency.

This new initiative aims to do something any rational person should support: eliminate wasteful spending and root out fraud in Washington. Yet, Democrats treat it like a personal attack. Why? Because waste isn’t a flaw in their system — it’s the foundation of their political machine.

Now that the DOGE is daring to ask, 'Should we maybe stop setting money on fire?' Democrats are in full meltdown mode.

For decades, the left has built its empire on a bloated, unaccountable government that burns through taxpayer dollars with no regard for efficiency, effectiveness, or common sense. Every redundant program, every duplicate agency, and every absurd study — like researching shrimp on treadmills or “equitable tree planting” — isn’t just a mistake. It’s a jobs program for the Democrats' allies and a slush fund for their agenda. They don’t want a lean, effective government. They want an ever-expanding bureaucracy that secures their power.

The numbers don’t lie. Every year, Washington wastes hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars on blatant fraud and inefficiency. This isn’t about minor accounting errors — it’s about reckless spending. Examples include $2.1 million for a climate change video game, $6 million to boost Egyptian tourism, and $28 million for forest camouflage uniforms for Afghan soldiers — in a country that is 99% desert.

These aren’t isolated incidents. This is standard operating procedure in Washington. Now that the DOGE is daring to ask, “Should we maybe stop setting money on fire?” Democrats are in full meltdown mode.

Protect the bloat, launder money

This is the part where Democrats insist that cutting waste means slashing “essential programs” for the poor. It’s the same lie they use every time someone suggests fiscal responsibility. They’ve played this game for years — protect the bloat, fund their allies, then cry poverty when called out.

The truth is, government waste isn’t helping struggling Americans. It’s lining the pockets of left-wing nonprofits, corrupt contractors, and activist organizations that exist solely to keep Democrats in power.

Look at the grift. Teachers’ unions, “climate justice” groups, and woke diversity consultants rake in massive taxpayer-funded grants and contracts. Then, miraculously, they donate millions right back into Democrat campaign coffers. This isn’t governance — it’s money laundering. The system is designed to take your money, hand it to Democratic donors, and have those donors funnel a cut back to the politicians who keep the racket alive.

That’s why the same politicians who claim to fight for the working class will prioritize a taxpayer-funded gender studies program in Pakistan over helping American workers. These programs don’t exist to help people. They exist to expand the federal government, create more Democrat voters, and funnel more money to the ruling class. The moment you try to stop it, you become their enemy.

That’s exactly what’s happening with the DOGE. The moment the Department of Government Efficiency started investigating wasteful spending, bureaucrats and Democratic politicians began working behind the scenes to undermine it.

A program designed to stop fraud and waste should have bipartisan support. Instead, Democrats are sabotaging it at every turn.

Democrats accuse DOGE of being “politically motivated,” which is laughable coming from the same people who weaponized the FBI, Justice Department, and nearly every federal agency against their political enemies. They claim it will “harm essential programs” — a tacit admission that these so-called essential programs are riddled with fraud and waste. They whine that the DOGE is a “power grab,” when in reality, it’s the first serious effort in decades to cut off the ruling class from its unlimited taxpayer-funded piggy bank.

Bureaucracy on defense

It’s not just politicians who are panicking. The unelected bureaucrats who run Washington like their personal kingdom are scrambling to stop the DOGE from doing its job. The permanent D.C. establishment isn’t just packed with Democrats — it’s a revolving door of career operatives cycling between government jobs, left-wing nonprofits, academia, and the media. These people depend on government bloat to maintain their influence. Cut the waste, and you cut their power. That’s why they’re mobilizing to block the DOGE from delivering the accountability Americans expect.

What’s truly infuriating is that Democrats have the audacity to claim cutting waste is “anti-government.” No, what’s anti-government is creating a system so dysfunctional, corrupt, and wasteful that Americans lose faith in it entirely. That’s exactly what the left has done to Washington. Leftists turned the federal government into a money pit that funds everyone except the people it’s supposed to serve. Now that someone is finally trying to fix it, they’re throwing a tantrum.

Meanwhile, they’re funneling hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to Ukraine with no oversight. They’re ignoring billions in welfare fraud while hiring 87,000 new IRS agents to shake down small business owners and working Americans. At the same time, Medicaid fraud alone drains over $100 billion a year from taxpayers. Where is their concern for fiscal responsibility when it comes to their own spending?

Nowhere — because this was never about responsible government. It’s about power, control, and keeping their political machine well-funded.

The same people who demand “fairness” and “transparency” in government never want to discuss where the money goes. They don’t want you asking why Soros-backed nonprofits keep receiving federal grants. They don’t want you questioning why the Clinton Health Access Initiative has received millions from USAID. They don’t want you to notice how taxpayer money is laundered through activist groups and handed out like candy to political allies. Because once you do, their entire narrative collapses.

The American people are fed up with seeing their hard-earned money wasted on corruption, fraud, and leftist activism disguised as government programs. The DOGE is finally doing what no one in Washington has dared to do — demand accountability. That’s why the left is panicking. Once Americans see how much of their money has been stolen, wasted, and funneled into the Democratic machine, the backlash will be relentless.

Democrats aren’t worried that the DOGE will cut “essential programs.” They’re terrified it will expose how much of their political power depends on fraud. They know that once Americans see the truth, they won’t just demand cuts to wasteful spending — they’ll demand the removal of every corrupt politician who enabled it.

And that reckoning is long overdue.

REVEALED: The dark history of USAID



President Donald Trump and the DOGE team have begun unraveling the absurd spending of taxpayer dollars by investigating USAID — and it appears it’ll never end.

USAID was created by President John F. Kennedy in an executive order that made it a tool of American foreign policy to combat Russian or Soviet communist subversion worldwide, and it was supposed to stay that way.

Once the Cold War ceased to be a threat, USAID had to find a reason to exist.

“It lost its sense of mission and lost its focus. It started looking for new functions, and in looking for new functions, it brought on more and more and more contractors, and it became an entity of its own,” J. Michael Waller, who subcontracted with USAID in the late '80s and early '90s, tells Jill Savage and Matthew Peterson of “Blaze News Tonight.”


“I never wanted anything to do with them after the mid-90s when I saw they were becoming a club of friends and cronies in the Washington Beltway area and all their friends around the country and around the world, and then you had people in USAID making top government salaries leaving to become top contractors with USAID and getting paid a ton more money,” Waller explains.

“It became this sense of careerism,” he continues, “where you work your way to the top in order to become a contractor, and you leave your say $150,000 a year job to become a contractor for $250,000 a year. And then if you start up your own contracting company with USAID you’re allowed to make a 10% profit on top of the gross value of the contractor.”

Federal law allows CEOs of government contractors to make over $600,000 a year.

“If you’re paying yourself as a CEO, you get your CEO salary, plus all of that profit margin, so you can become a millionaire in a very short time,” he adds.

Want more from 'Blaze News Tonight'?

To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won’t see anywhere else, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Pentagon Scraps Biden-Era Policy Subsidizing Travel Expenses For Employee Abortions

In a major win for America’s unborn, the Trump Defense Department officially revoked a Biden-era policy that authorized the use of taxpayer money to subsidize agency employees’ abortion-related travel expenses. In a memo issued Wednesday, Defense Travel Management Office Deputy Director Sarah Moore notified the Pentagon’s Military Advisory Panel that the Biden administration’s policy of […]

Indiana Republicans Should Defund Group That Sued For ‘Nonbinary’ Driver’s Licenses

Gov. Braun should defund the left-wing Indiana Legal Services, which seeks to undermine Indiana values with 'nonbinary' driver's licenses.

Democrats Hijack Doug Collins’ Confirmation Hearing To Push Extreme Abortion Agenda

'We will be looking at that issue when I get in there to confirm that the VA is actually following the law.'

Speaker Johnson draws line in sand on sending more taxpayer dollars to Ukraine, demands Biden address the border crisis



Speaker Mike Johnson (R) is drawing a line in the sand on Ukraine military assistance.

On Monday, Office of Management and Budget Director Shalanda Young told Johnson that American aid to Ukraine will dry up by the end of the year without further congressional action.

"We are out of money — and nearly out of time," Young warned.

In late October, Biden asked Congress to pass a $106 billion funding bill that gives more than $61 billion to Ukraine. That would be on top of the $111 billion the U.S. has already sent Ukraine. But Johnson says not so fast.

The speaker sent Young a letter on Tuesday explaining that "supplemental Ukraine funding is dependent upon enactment of transformative change to our nation’s border security laws."

— (@)  
 

And not only does the border crisis require more attention, but Johnson said Biden must give the American people answers about their strategy for helping Ukraine.

"The American people must be provided with answers to our repeated questions concerning: the Administration’s strategy to prevail in Ukraine; clearly defined and obtainable objectives; transparency and accountability for U.S. taxpayer dollars invested there; and what specific resources are required to achieve victory and a sustainable peace," Johnson explained.

He added:

President Biden must satisfy Congressional oversight inquiries about the Administration’s failure thus far to present clearly defined objectives, and its failure to provide essential weapons on a timely basis. American taxpayers deserve a full accounting of how prior U.S. military and humanitarian aid has been spent, and an explanation of the president’s strategy to ensure an accelerated path to victory. In light of the current state of the U.S. economy and the massive amount of our national debt, it is our duty in Congress to demand answers to these reasonable questions, and we still await the answers.

Johnson is right.

American support for Ukraine is waning, and the Biden administration has not sold the American people on why their tax dollars should help fight a war that is largely inconsequential for them, especially when economic concerns plague the average American.

Still, Johnson is not per se opposed to helping Ukraine; he simply wants accountability for the American people and for the White House to prioritize domestic concerns, like the border crisis. A solution, then, will likely require both sides to compromise.

 Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

State Department warns what could happen to $100 million in taxpayer dollars that Biden is sending to Gaza, West Bank



The State Department admitted Thursday that humanitarian aid sent to Gaza could easily end up in Hamas' control.

At the department's press briefing, spokesman Matthew Miller revealed that Israel is warning about sending money directly into Gaza to benefit innocent civilians because Hamas controls everything in the Gaza Strip.

"The concern the Israeli government has — and they've said this publicly and they’ve certainly said it privately to us — is that any assistance that goes in will be diverted once it's inside Gaza," Miller revealed.

"There's not an Israeli military force in Gaza, there’s not a U.N. peacekeeping force in Gaza. The people with guns inside Gaza are Hamas," he explained. "And so Hamas may try to divert this assistance and keep it from getting to the civilians who it is intended for."

Because Hamas controls Gaza, the U.S. government has a "legitimate concern" that any aid sent to Gaza will be taken by Hamas and directed toward its war effort against Israel, Miller added.

While in Israel on Wednesday, President Joe Biden announced that $100 million in taxpayer dollars will be sent to the Palestinians in the form of humanitarian relief.

Biden told Hamas not to steal the money but did not warn of any consequences aside from the money tap drying up. The Biden administration has not said how U.S. officials will prevent Hamas from stuffing its coffers with the aid. Miller only said the State Department is working on "mechanisms" for the delivery of the money but did not elaborate further.

There have already been allegations of Hamas stealing materials meant for innocent Palestinian civilians.

On Sunday, the United Nations agency responsible for supporting Palestinian refugees — the UNRWA, officially known as the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East — released a statement accusing Hamas authorities of raiding a UNRWA compound in Gaza City of fuel and critical medical supplies.

The agency later suspiciously walked back that statement. But United Nations and Israeli sources confirmed it was true.

 Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

'Hamilton' creator Lin-Manuel Miranda wants $2.5 billion taxpayer-funded bailout for failing theater companies



Lin-Manuel Miranda – the creator and lead actor of "Hamilton" – called on Congress to provide failing theater companies with a massive taxpayer-funded bailout.

Miranda and "The Cosby Show" star Phylicia Rashad pleaded with lawmakers to furnish the theater industry with $500 million in annual federal funding for the next five years – a total of $2.5 billion in taxpayer funds.

"The person who [will have written] your favorite musical is working on it right now in a small theater somewhere in this country," Miranda said during a Senate briefing on Thursday at the Russell Senate Office Building. "And those small theaters are closing, and those small theaters are in crisis."

Rashad told lawmakers that theater is principally "communication from the heart."

"When we communicate from the heart, other hearts are touched," Rashad asserted. "This is why theater creates community."

The briefing was hosted by Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) as a way to introduce the Supporting Theater and Generating Economic Activity Act. The STAGE Act is a "federal funding initiative that has the potential to stimulate the theater industry as it continues to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic and other challenges." The legislation was unveiled by the Professional Non-Profit Theater Coalition, an organization representing 140 theaters from across the country.

Oskar Eustis, artistic director of New York’s Public Theater, told the Los Angeles Times, "To the federal government, it’s a pretty small amount of money, but it would make an unbelievable difference to theaters across the country. Every theater would survive, and could serve our communities in ways that, right now, we’re struggling to do."

Theater attendance has dropped by as much as 30% since the pandemic shutdowns of March 2020, according to the Washington Post. There are reportedly two to three theater companies shuttering each month.

Many theaters have already received funding from the federal government from the Shuttered Venue Operators Grant program in 2020 – which supplied $15 billion for "ailing entertainment spaces and promoters in the largest public rescue of the arts in U.S. history."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!