no, my orginal STATEMENT was that matters of immigration are by virtue of the constitution exclusively within congress powers. You then tried to make some meaningless distinction between naturalization and immigration. I showed you a number of supreme court cites which proved you wrong. Twodees has been licking your butt since.
The distinction between naturalization and immigration is not meaningless, it is essential. The Constitution explicitly gives the federal government the exclusive authority in terms of naturalization - naturalization is the process by which a non-citizen becomes a citizen. Naturalization has nothing to do with how that potential citizen came to be living within the territory of the USA (indeed, theoretically, according to the Constitution, the naturalized citizen might not even be living in the territory of the USA at time of naturalization - because citizenship and migration are two seperate matters). If the Constitution had intended to give exclusive authority over the matter of migration (in or out) to the federal government, it would have done so. It did not. Therefore, according to the 10th Amendment, it does not have any such exclusive authority. Ergo, you are wrong. Again.
I think the best thing everyone on this thread should do is completely ignore him and Dane. That's my plan. You can't debate with a bozo.