A doubt has been expressed about whether Congress has the authority to prohibit voting by aliens. I believe that view is unfounded. There are several constitutional grounds for this authority. including the plenary power of Congress over immigration matters. which has been referred to so many times over the years by the U.S. Supreme Court and also the clause that guarantees what is called a republican form of government. That standard to be applied Is a "rational relationship to a legitimate Federal Government purpose." So. obviously. enforcing the immigration laws of the United States and. in particular. the naturalization lawsthe requirements and procedures an alien must follow to become a naturalized U.S. citizen Is a legitimate Federal Government purpose. Indeed. immigration and naturalization is. along with national defense. the most fundamental of the Federal Governments responsibilities. That is undoubtedly why the Supreme Court has made such extraordinary statements over the years. about just how plenary-"plenary" meaning complete and absolutelyhow plenary that power is. Just one example. quote from the case of Oceanic Steam Navigation Co. versus Stranahan. and then quoted later with approval In Fiallo versus Bell and Kleindienst versus Mandel: Over no conceivable subject is the legislative power of Congress more complete than it is over the admission of aliens. The encouragement of naturalization has been explicitly recognized by the Supreme Court as a legitimate purpose of Federal actions favoring citizens. That was the case of Hampton versus Mow Sun Wong. So the prohibition of voting by aliens in Federal elections only would clearly be rationally related to a purpose encouraging naturalization. which is. as I say. one of the premium subjects in the legislative power of Congress. So that is the extent of the amendment and my explanation of the amendment. Further debate?
Keywords matched
naturalization naturalized immigration