Wikipedia talk:Sandbox
 |
You can either edit the source code ("Edit source" tab above) or use VisualEditor ("Edit" tab above). Click the "Publish changes" button when finished. You can click "Show preview" to see a preview of your edits, or "Show changes" to see what you have changed. Anyone can edit this page and it is automatically cleared regularly (anything you write will not remain indefinitely). Click here to reset the sandbox. You can access your personal sandbox by clicking here, or using the "Sandbox" link in the top right.Creating an account gives you access to a personal sandbox, among other benefits. Do NOT, under any circumstances, place promotional, copyrighted, offensive, or libelous content in sandbox pages. Doing so WILL get you blocked from editing. For more info about sandboxes, see Wikipedia:About the sandbox and Help:My sandbox. New to Wikipedia? See the contributing to Wikipedia page or our tutorial. Questions? Try the Teahouse! |
Plyer v doe is referenced under legal challenges.:
"In November 1997, Pfaelzer found the law to be unconstitutional on the basis that it infringed the federal government's exclusive jurisdiction over matters relating to immigration, similar to the Supreme Court ruling in Plyler v. Doe."
But plyer v doe rests on the 14th amendment and not the supremacy clause. Also, citation 20 refers to a times article that does not refer to plyer v doe. I will remove the reference if no one objects. I would be interested in a reference to the injunction itself, which would clarify any connection between the Pfaelzer ruling and plyer v doe.
99.90.121.151 (talk) 18:11, 7 May 2011 (UTC)Mike 5/7/2011