Today we are repeatedly told that the United States government has exclusive authority concerning illegal immigration. In fact, the Obama administration filed lawsuits in various Federal District Courts that challenge State immigration laws in Arizona, Oklahoma, Missouri, Utah, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina and Indiana. It is not a surprise that several Federal District Judges have ruled against the States, finding their laws unconstitutional because the States have no authority to make their laws concerning illegal immigration. However, these statements and court opinions are not true as a matter of history and law. The words "Immigration" and "Illegal Immigration" are not in the Constitution for the United States of America. The enumerated power delegated to the federal government concerning an alien becoming a Citizen of a State and/or the United States is found in Article I, Section 8, Clause 4, of the federal Constitution, which states, in part:
"The Congress shall have Power To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization" …
The United States Congress passed uniform Naturalization Laws in 1790, 1795 and 1798. The 1798 Act was part of four "Alien and Sedition Acts" passed by the Federalist that year.
To repeal the Naturalization Act of 1798, Congress passed the Naturalization Law of 1802 on April 14, 1802 (2 Stat. 153). This Act, among other things, directed the clerk of the court to record the entry of all aliens into these United States. The clerk collected information that included the applicant's name, birthplace, age, nation of allegiance, country of emigration, and place of intended settlement, and granted each applicant a certificate that could be exhibited to the court as evidence of the time of arrival in the United States.
The Act of 1802 reaffirmed that every State and Territorial court was considered a district court within the meaning of the laws pertaining to naturalization, and that any persons naturalized in such courts were accorded the same rights and privileges as if they had been naturalized in a district or circuit court of the United States. This Act was the last major piece of naturalization legislation during the 19th century. A number of minor revisions were introduced, but these merely altered or clarified details of evidence and certification without changing the basic nature of the admission procedure.
An illegal immigrant in the United States is a (non-citizen) who has entered any State of the Union or the United States of America or one of its territories without government permission and is thus in violation of United States Nationality Law, or stayed beyond the termination date of a visa, which is also a violation of the law.
Only the State and local authorities rightly regulated immigration and prosecuted illegal immigrants within the States until after the so-called 14th Amendment alleged ratification in 1868.
In 1875, the United States Supreme Court decided the Chy Lung v. Freeman case (92 U.S. 275 (1875)) which was brought to the Supreme Court through the so-called 14th Amendment. This case was initiated because a California Statute clearly had a main purpose to extort money from a large class of Chinese immigrants, or to prevent their immigration to California altogether. The U.S. Supreme Court based its decision in this case on a violation of the "commerce clause", not the "naturalization clause", of the Constitution for the United States of America, by holding: "The statute of California in this respect extends far beyond the necessity in which the right, if it exists, is founded, and invades the right of Congress to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and is therefore void."
By using this Supreme Court decision, others that followed, and the so-called 14th Amendment, the United States Congress, Presidents and Courts have increasingly expanded the alleged federal authority and power over immigration within the States of the Union. All of these usurpations of power have clearly been unconstitutional, thus they are all null and void as a matter of law.
The people are the sovereigns in America. This is unique to our State and federal governments.
Remember, the Constitution of Pennsylvania, Article I, Sections 1 and 2, state, respectively:
"All men are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent and indefeasible rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and reputation, and of pursuing their own happiness."
"All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness." …
The "Declaration of Independence" also confirms that the people are sovereign by stating:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." …
Clearly, an individual, as the sovereign, has, at a minimum, the constitutionally protected, inherent and indefeasible rights of life, liberty and property. No objective person would deny that an individual has the fundamental and primary right to protect himself, his family and his property against any and all attacks with the appropriate lawful force. For example, if his or her property is on the border of this country, each individual still has all of these God given rights, authority, duty and responsibilities. Clearly a property owner always has the lawful authority to protect his or her rights against any and all trespassers.
As a sovereign inhabitant of a Township, each individual of that municipality, while always retaining the authority to protect their rights, authorizes the local government to act on his or her behalf to protect the sovereign, his or her life, liberty, property and all of his or her other rights.
Likewise each Citizen in a County authorizes those in the County government to act on his or her behalf to protect his or her life, liberty, property and all of his or her other rights.
The Citizens of the State, individually and collectively, also authorize those in the State government to protect each and every individual's rights.
And finally, we the people, always the sovereigns, individually and collectively, likewise authorize those in the federal government to protect our rights and to only act strictly according to the original intent of the few and well defined powers enumerated in the federal Constitution.
Again, by authorizing those at all levels of government to act on our behalf according to the very specific provisions in either the State Constitution and/or the Constitution for the United States of America, we, Citizens of the State and/or the United States of America, individually still retain all of our sovereign powers, rights, privileges, immunities and responsibilities.
The United States government obviously does not lawfully have exclusive power and/or authority to stop illegal immigration. Those in the Local, County, State and federal governments all have concurrent delegated power and fundamental responsibility to protect the Citizens, individually and collectively, against this unlawful behavior. Illegal immigration is always a crime. Our laws, which are constitutional and thus valid, must be enforced equally by all those in government.
For the U.S. and/or State governments to say that they lack the funds to fully prosecute all illegal aliens is a failure of their fundamental responsibilities. To fund foreign aid while not fully funding the efforts to eliminate illegal immigration is, and always has been, equally a crime.
Yes, stopping illegal immigration is everyone's responsibility!