I came across the following article a while back and thought it would be productive to comment on it now considering immigration is one of the priorities in the coming election. SEE: Obama administration tells states they can't refuse Syrian refugees
November 26, 2015
”The Obama administration warned states over the Syrian refugee crisis Wednesday, telling them in a letter they do not have legal authority to refuse the refugees, and states that do not comply may be subject to enforcement action.”
The problem with Obama’s assertion is, there is no provision in our Constitution to support his absurd threat of enforcement.
I certainly cannot find a power delegated to Congress or the President in our written Constitution repealing a power exercised by the States under the Articles of Confederation during which time each state was free to regulate immigration into their own state. And keep in mind the Tenth Amendment declares powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved by the States. But there is an exception made to this power under our existing Constitution which the States knowingly and willingly greed to ___the exception being Article 1, Section 9, which reads:
"The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person."
The above delegated power allows Congress to lay a tax or duty on the importation of foreigners, but leaves each State otherwise free to regulate and set its own immigration policy in a manner which serves each particular State's interests, and the general welfare of the State.
So, the question remains, under what wording in our Constitution has Congress or the president been delegated a power to admit tens of thousands, or even millions of poverty stricken and destitute foreigners on to American soil and then require unwilling states to accept them?
Let us recall what Chief Justice Marshall emphasized while the ink was barely dry on our existing Constitution:
The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? ______ MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)
JWK
The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. ___ Madison, Federalist Paper No. 47
November 26, 2015
”The Obama administration warned states over the Syrian refugee crisis Wednesday, telling them in a letter they do not have legal authority to refuse the refugees, and states that do not comply may be subject to enforcement action.”
The problem with Obama’s assertion is, there is no provision in our Constitution to support his absurd threat of enforcement.
I certainly cannot find a power delegated to Congress or the President in our written Constitution repealing a power exercised by the States under the Articles of Confederation during which time each state was free to regulate immigration into their own state. And keep in mind the Tenth Amendment declares powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved by the States. But there is an exception made to this power under our existing Constitution which the States knowingly and willingly greed to ___the exception being Article 1, Section 9, which reads:
"The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person."
The above delegated power allows Congress to lay a tax or duty on the importation of foreigners, but leaves each State otherwise free to regulate and set its own immigration policy in a manner which serves each particular State's interests, and the general welfare of the State.
So, the question remains, under what wording in our Constitution has Congress or the president been delegated a power to admit tens of thousands, or even millions of poverty stricken and destitute foreigners on to American soil and then require unwilling states to accept them?
Let us recall what Chief Justice Marshall emphasized while the ink was barely dry on our existing Constitution:
The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? ______ MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)
JWK
The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. ___ Madison, Federalist Paper No. 47
