“But does the power to regulate naturalization imply the power to regulate immigration, as some would suggest? It would, if the power to regulate immigration were a direct logical consequence of the power to regulate immigration. But it isn’t. Naturalization is the process by which non-citizens become citizens. Immigration is the process of moving from one country to another, or region to another.”

I disagree with your and the Cato Institute’s position that the naturalization clause and the fifth amendment deny the federal government from controlling immigration. Throughout the history of the United States the Supreme Court has upheld all manner of federal statutes regulating immigration.

Article IV, Section 4 states “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion”. I am surprised that this clause has apparently not been cited as justification for the federal government regulating immigration.