If what you say is true, then there are no valid Federal immigration laws and, therefore, all the illegal immigrants are legal immigrants - since most states don't have their own immigration laws.
Further, any state can make them citizens, then they could move to other states as citizens. (See Article IV, section 1 and 2)
I agree with your reasoning, not that it is your opinion. There are no valid federal immigration laws imo.
Simply put, the federal government has no powers other than those which the states delegate to the feds expressly via the Constitution. And although politically correct interpretations of the the Uniform Rule of Naturalization Clause (1.8.4) are used to argue the validity of federal immigrations, such arguments are in error imo.
More specfically, note that both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, Madison generally regarded as the father of the Constitution, had written, in terms of the 10th Amendment nonetheless, that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate immigration, immigration therefore a state power issue.
As mentioned in related threads, here is the relevant excerpt from Jefferson’s writing.
“4. _Resolved_, That alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are: that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens. And it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” the act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the — day of July, 1798, intituled “An Act concerning aliens,” which assumes powers over alien friends, not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force [emphasis added].” —Thomas Jefferson, Draft of the Kentucky Resolutions - October 1798.
And here is the related excerpt from the writings of James Madison in Virginia Resolutions.
"That the General Assembly doth particularly protest against the palpable and alarming infractions of the Constitution, in the two late cases of the "Alien and Sedition Acts" passed at the last session of Congress; the first of which exercises a power no where delegated to the federal government, ...Further, any state can make them citizens, then they could move to other states as citizens. (See Article IV, section 1 and 2)”…
… the General Assembly doth solemenly appeal to the like dispositions of the other states, in confidence that they will concur with this commonwealth in declaring, as it does hereby declare, that the acts aforesaid, are unconstitutional; and that the necessary and proper measures will be taken by each, for co-operating with this state, in maintaining the Authorities, Rights, and Liberties, referred to the States respectively, or to the people [emphasis added]. ”— James Madison, Draft of the Virginia Resolutions - December 1798.
It is my understanding that when the Founding States drafted the Constitution there were problems with the states making people citizens, part of the problem being that different states unsurprisingly had different citizenship requirements. So when the Founding States drafted the Constitution they made the Uniform Rule of Naturalization Clause to deliberately let the feds call the shots with respect to who becomes a USA citizen.
I won’t go into detail, but the first unconstitutional federal immigration laws started appearing in the books after the Civil War as a consequence of PC interpretations of constitutional clauses other than the Uniform Rule of Naturalization Clause imo. And the 17th Amendment ultimately provided the corrupt feds with more opportunity to get away with making unconstitutional immigration laws.
Unconstitutional, vote-winning federal immigration laws is another reason that the 17th Amendment needs to disappear.