The Constitution enshrines, explicitly or implicitly, the right to welcome immigrants -- a political and legal journey that continues to be challenging and complex. Though the American Republic is certainly more democratic than it once was, issues such as discrimination against immigrants (regardless of legal status), as well as the extent to which the President has the power to enact immigration policy such as DACA, continue to raise concerns. Recent Supreme Court decisions, like Trump v. Hawaii (2018) and DHS v. University of California (2020) are indeed thought-provoking. To what extent can the Executive Branch constitutionally enact or terminate immigration programs?
Ilya Somin, J.D. is a professor of law at George Mason University. His research focuses on constitutional law, property law, democratic theory, federalism, and migration rights. Somin’s work has appeared in numerous scholarly journals, including the Yale Law Journal, Stanford Law Review, Northwestern University Law Review, Georgetown Law Journal, and Critical Review. Somin’s writings have been cited in decisions by the United States Supreme Court, multiple state supreme courts, lower federal courts, and the Supreme Court of Israel.
Charles Stimson, J.D. is a widely recognized expert in national security, homeland security, crime control, drug policy and immigration. A senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation since 2007, Stimson became Manager of the National Security Law Program in Heritage’s Institute for Constitutional Government in April 2013 after serving as Heritage’s chief of staff for a year. Stimson writes and lectures on policy issues such as the law of armed conflict, terrorist detainee policy and interrogations, the Geneva Conventions, military commissions, the Patriot Act and FISA, criminal law and the death penalty, immigration and the war on drugs.