The immigration debate continues to rage, and as is normally the case, the solutions of the left and the right both end up in the exact same place: a larger federal government.
The only way to see this situation with any clarity is from the perspective of liberty, which is the perspective of the founders—and when you do, the view changes significantly.
All across social media, not even to speak of the mainstream media, people seem to be looking at the immigration issue incorrectly. The old parties take their predictable positions. People inclined more leftward seem to want open borders with full-time Virtue Signaling Teams distributing government benefits to lure in new voters, while many on the right want to register everyone, build a wall and, if pushed, probably put sharpshooters at the top.
The constitutional perspective is completely different.
To begin with, the Constitution is essentially a libertarian document in the sense that its main concern is the liberty of the people, accomplished by restraining the size of government—the main threat to individual liberty. The federal government, the founders said, can exercise only those powers we delegate to it. The rest go to the people and the states. In fact, the main power that governments could have, the “police power” to pass laws relating to health, safety and welfare, was denied the federal government and given the states by the founders.
So, does the Constitution specifically give the power over immigration to the federal government? Before you can say of course it does, take a close look at the enumerated powers.
It does not.
Continue reading via Tenth Amendment Center (TAC): The Immigration Double-Cross
Article by John D. Pierce, Esq. John “JD” Pierce is a Contributor to the Tenth Amendment Center, a property law attorney, an adjunct law professor, a registered Libertarian and an avid Constitutionalist.
Summary via R3publican