[Victor_VI]

If you dispute the above, please provide an explicit statement in the Constitution giving these powers to any branch of the government.

Article I, Section 9

"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."

Now, why would the Founders feel the need to restrict a power of Congress, for a specific period of time, that they didn't believe it had in the first place? Obviously, they had no issue with Congress regulating the migration of persons after 1808.

The authority to control borders is an implied power of sovereignty. Apparently the Founders understood it exists a priori, else they wouldn't have needed to explicitly restrict it. Apparently Ron Paul also understands that.

[DugwayDuke]

Thank you. I’ve asked that question several times and you are the first to give a realistic answer. I withdraw my objection.

That said, how does Ron Paul square his support of the libertarian platform (he did run for president on such) that supports open borders and his current opposition to illegal immigration? Does Paul still support privitization of highways, police forces, fire departments? I think this is a critical question in case Paul does get the nomination in the same sense that any number of people are challenging other candidates to justify their current positions on gun control, abortion, etc., with their past positions.