SPENCER AND KING DEBATE SCHEY AND POLANCO

Speaking of the Plyer case, which held on a 5 to 4 split decision that states are obligated to pay for the education of children who are in the country illegally, Schey boasted that he had been awarded approximately $250,000 from the court for legal fees and that he had used the money to invest in an office building.

The following is from the December, 1994 issue of the Voice of Citizens Together newsletter.

Sherman Oaks, Calif. -- December 1 , 1994 -- VCT -- On September 29, Glenn Spencer, President of the Voice of Citizens Together was involved in a debate over Proposition 187 at a luncheon at the Jade West restaurant hosted by the Lexington Group of Century City, an organization made up of lawyers and other professionals.

Mr. Ron Turozski (310-312-4224) of the Lexington group moderated the debate. Representing the pro - 187 side with Spencer was Mr. Bill King, former Chief Border Patrol Agent of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Representing the anti-187 side were State Assemblyman Richard Polanco and Mr. Peter Schey, the attorney who argued the Plyler v. Doe case before the U.S. Supreme Court.

According to Spencer, Bill King informed him that Mr. Schey was not a citizen of the United States at the time he won the Plyler case and that he had been a constant source of harassment of the INS for years.

During the debate King asked Schey if he had ever bothered to become a U.S. citizen. Schey declined to respond.

Schey said that if Proposition 187 were to pass, his organization, the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, would file a law suit to stop its enforcement. This in fact, has happened.

Schey is also involved in another organization, the National Lawyers Guild, which has petitioned the United Nations to intervene in California over the Proposition 187 issue.

According to a recently published book Importing Revolution - Open Borders and the Radical Agenda (American Immigration Control Foundation), in 1950, the House Un-American Activities Committee published a document called "Report on the National Lawyers Guild: Legal Bulwark of the Communist Party."

While its supporters claim that the NLG is not a communist organization, its aims seem to run counter to the interest of many Americans.

For example, at its convention in 1978, it adopted the following resolution:

To support the movement for full democratic rights for all non-citizens and end all deportations and manipulations of the border carried out in the interests of capitalism;

To demand an end to government-sponsored violence, racist harassment and mass deprivation of civil rights carried out under the pretext of enforcing immigration laws;

To require the granting of political asylum status to applicants fleeing from repressive governments such as those of Haiti, Mexico, Thailand, Chile and Iran;

To eliminate all anti-communist provisions presently included in the immigration act;

To encourage local chapters to develop training programs and legal clinics to support mass defense efforts against deportations and for aiding immigrants in obtaining permanent residence status;

Through the National Immigration Project and local chapters encourages and conducts education around the question of open borders.