Eric Holder blows it in Arizona Complaint [immigration case].


The complaint is in fact defective on its face and ought to be laughed out of court! The complaint alleges that:

“In our constitutional system, the federal government has preeminent authority to regulate immigration matters. This authority derives from the United States Constitution and numerous acts of Congress.”

Please note that if no “authority” has been granted to Congress over “immigration matters”, then any acts of Congress over immigration matters are immediately called into question as not having a constitutional basis.

The complaint continues:

“JURISDICTION AND VENUE”

Under this heading, which is necessary to establish jurisdiction over the subject matter, it mentions Article VI, clause 2 of the Constitution which declares:

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

Presumably, this part of the Constitution has been referenced in the complaint to indicate any laws written by Congress with respect to “immigration matters” shall be the supreme law of the land. But this only applies if in fact Congress has been granted power over “immigration matters”.

The complaint then mentions Article 1, Section 8, of the Constitution as establishing the necessary “jurisdiction” over “immigration matters“, but omits or fails to identify the specific clause under Article 1, section 8 which mentions immigration or immigration matters.

Article 1, Section 8 reads as follows:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

As one can see, the word immigration does not even appear in the section pointed to in the complaint, which is necessary to establish jurisdiction. What does appear in that section is a power granted to Congress “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization”. And what is the meaning of “naturalization” as the word appears in our Constitution and was used by our founding fathers?

While debating our nation’s Rule of Naturalization in 1790, REPRESENTATIVE WHITE gives us the meaning of naturalization: “the power vested by the Constitution in Congress, respecting the subject now before the House, extend to nothing more than making a uniform rule of naturalization. After a person has once become a citizen, the power of congress ceases to operate upon him” see: Rule of Naturalization, Feb. 3rd, 1790, page 1152

In fact “naturalization” is the act by which one becomes a citizen. And what was the specific intentions for which Congress was granted a power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization?

Sherman, who attended the Convention which framed our Constitution notes the intentions for which the power [Naturalization] was granted to Congress. He says: “that Congress should have the power of naturalization, in order to prevent particular States receiving citizens, and forcing them upon others who would not have received them in any other manner. It was therefore meant to guard against an improper mode of naturalization, rather than foreigners should be received upon easier terms than those adopted by the several States.” see CONGRESSIONAL DEBATES, Rule of Naturalization, Feb. 3rd, 1790, page 1148

There is a vast difference between the two words “naturalization” [the act by which one becomes a citizen] and “immigration” [the migration of people from one place to another], and for the complainant to fail establishing the required jurisdiction over “immigration matters” while contending a supreme authority exists over that that specific subject matter, leaves a fatal defect on the face of the complaint, especially when no such power has been specifically vested in the powers of Congress. The complaint ought to be laughed out of court.