Montana court strikes down last piece of anti-immigrant law

The court's decision upholds a ruling that denying unemployment insurance benefits, crime victim services, professional or trade licenses, university enrollment and financial aid and services for the disabled, among other things, was unconstitutional.
__ The law requires conditions be met for a non-Citizen to work within the US. Employment in violation of the law is an illegal activity. Illegal activity should be stopped
__ The illegal worker whose illegal employment has been terminated due to their illegal activity, is now unemployed. There are conditions for determining eligibility for unemployment compensation. It seems to me that illegal conduct that affects the ability to continue employment is adequate justification to deny unemployment compensation. If they were here legally but worked in violation of the law, or if they were here illegally, they should be deported. If for some reason they are still entitled to unemployment benefits they should collect them their mail box, in their country of origin.
__ The employer should face due process for the illegal employment of an illegal worker. If found guilty, the employer should face severe criminal punishment, including incarceration and fines. Those employers that are repeat offenders should face progressively severe penalties for repeat offenses.
__ Crime victim services should be extended until the decision is rendered at their deportation hearing
__ The US has no authority to issue professional or trade licenses for work in the illegal workers country of origin. The illegal worker should not be practicing their profession or trade in the US. This is a moot point.
__ The law requires conditions be met for a non-Citizen to attend higher education institutions within the US. One is legal residency; Illegal residency should an automatic disqualification from attendance.
__ Disabled illegal workers should not be in the US. So why should the US be concerned with their financial needs. That burden lies with their country of origin and legal residence.

The justices rejected the requirement state workers report applicants, residing in the U.S. illegally, to immigration officials. "The risk of inconsistent and inaccurate judgments… from state agents untrained in immigration law… is evident."
__ That is why there are deportation hearings. A deportation hearing is due process. Due process is in place to mitigate "The risk of inconsistent and inaccurate judgments…” Should we deny eyewitnesses the mechanism to report crime? They are not trained in law enforcement. Their judgment may be inconsistent and inaccurate.

The law defined "illegal alien" as a person who is not a U.S. citizen who unlawfully entered or unlawfully remained in the United States. In the lawsuit, several plaintiffs said they arrived in the U.S. illegally but have since obtained permanent residence status.
__My wife worked in the consular section of the US Embassy in Nairobi. She informs me that presenting a fraudulent document in support of a visa application is a permanent disqualifier. What is worse, presenting a fraudulent document, or crossing the border in violation of US Law?

Sounds like a Sound and Logical Decision.