Let us keep in mind the fact that, the States have never surrendered their original authority to protect their borders from unwanted foreign nationals.
See New York v. Miln, 36 U.S. 102 (1837)
âThat the act of the Legislature of New York mentioned in the plaintiffâs declaration assumes to regulate trade and commerce between the port of New York and foreign ports, and is unconstitutional and void.â
The Supreme Court directed it to be certified to the Circuit Court of New York that so much of the section of the act of the Legislature of New York as applies to the breaches assigned in the declaration does not assume to regulate commerce between the port of New York and foreign ports, and that so much of the said act is constitutional.
The act of the Legislature of New York is not a regulation of commerce, but of police, and, being so, it was passed in the exercise of a power which rightfully belonged to the state. The State of New York possessed the power to pass this law before the adoption of the Constitution of the United States. The law was âintended to prevent the stateâs being burdened with an influx of foreigners and to prevent their becoming paupers, and who would be chargeable as such.â The end and means here used are within the competency of the states, since a portion of their powers were surrendered to the federal government."
Also see: HENDERSON v. MAYOR OF CITY OF NEW YORK , 92 U.S. 259 (1875)
âWe are of opinion that this whole subject has been con fided to Congress by the Constitution; that Congress can more appropriately and with more acceptance exercise it than any other body known to our law, state or national; that by providing a system of laws in these matters, applicable to all ports and to all vessels, a serious question, which has long been matter of contest and complaint, may be effectually and satisfactorily settled. [92 U.S. 259, 275] Whether, in the absence of such action, the States can, or how far they can, by appropriate legislation, protect themselves against actual paupers, vagrants, criminals, and diseased persons, arriving in their territory from foreign countries, we do not decide. The portions of the New York statute which concern persons who, on inspection, are found to belong to these classes, are not properly before us, because the relief sought is to the part of the statute applicable to all passengers alike, and is the only relief which can be given on this bill.â
.
JWK