Excellent post, but wait, soon the anti's will pollute it with their one sentence idiotic comments and lies.
We lose about a corps of unorganized militia a year through gun related violence. That is no invasion.
The united states was not specifically addressed in the above statement. The question presented was what country would entertain an invasion. An answer was provided.
Which is why I don't watch OTA news preferring to tap into the satellite links and get the raw feeds before they are selectively edited into propaganda.
Uh... yeah there is. Art 1 Sec 8 Clause 4 . https://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/?_escaped_fragment_=/articles/1/essays/40/naturalization
Our welfare clause is General and we have an express Commerce Clause; we should have no illegal problem with an express naturalization clause. Only lousy capitalists lose money on border policy under Capitalism.
We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States. Our Founding Fathers specifically enumerated a welfare-State not a warfare-State.
Dear, please try to stay on topic: You said there was no immigration applicable clause in the Constitution, that's simply incorrect. Don't be salty about it, admit your mistake and move on.
Dear, there is no immigration clause in our federal Constitution and supreme law of the land. And, we have an express establishment clause for naturalization, should we have to deal with right wing bigotry.
What on Earth do you mean? We have a naturalization process, the system of legal entry (visas) is part and parcel of that. There's no bigotry inherent in the process of legal entry. Racial bias is actually expressly verboten and punishable
An uniform rule of naturalization means we should have no illegal problem and all foreign nationals in the US should be federally identified. You confuse an immigration clause with a naturalization clause. We should be upgrading Ellis Island and surrounding infrastructure to promote and provide for the general welfare.