I am not saying the State can say who can immigrate by themselves or that they can naturalize citizens by themselves - that is clearly a Federal role.
But they can and should enforce standards for checking eligibility for employment - drivers licenses - law breaking - housing - etc, etc.
CA is ignoring both State and Federal law already. They are a “sanctuary” State. That is their path. Let Arizona and Alabama find a their own path.
That is what having State governments is all about. And that sort of thing IS their jurisdiction.
The failure of the Federal government to live up to their obligations doesn’t mean that the States should fail to live up to their own.
Couple of questions here.
One, what’s the constitutionality of requiring social security numbers to be used for employment? That wasn’t the purpose of their introduction.
From what I can see, there’s zero requirement for any employer in the US to be required to solicit the SSN for employment. However, the employer can ask and should conduct their own background checks.
If the employer is the state, by all means. Have the state require the use of an SSN is a decision that each state can make. The state doesn’t have the authority to require all businesses that operate with the state to do the same.
Driver’s licenses. Agreed. Law breaking. Yes, of course, but then we get to the question as to what constitutes the laws of the state? There are many laws which citizens break inadvertantly, should these be treated the same as other laws which are considered more serious?
Housing, I disagree. Housing isn’t a federal or a state role. Housing is, at least last I checked a market based industry. If an owner wishes to rent without checking ID, then that should be an option for them. Would that be a wise decision? No. But the government has no role overseeing all private transactions.