Omar Jadwat, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Immigrants' Rights Project, has asserted that immigration regulation is a federal matter and states cannot infringe upon it. Speaking before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government at a hearing titled "The Southern Border Crisis: The Constitution and the States," Jadwat made his position clear.
"Regulation of entry into and expulsion from the United States are exclusively federal matters from which the States are excluded," stated Jadwat, who has previously litigated cases against Trump administration’s Muslim ban according to ACLU records. A graduate of NYU Law School, Jadwat also serves as an adjunct professor there.
Jadwat further elaborated on his argument by citing a Supreme Court precedent of 150 years that assigns immigration regulation to the federal government, excluding states. He referenced notable cases such as Chy Lung v. Freeman (1875) and Arizona v. United States (2012), which explicitly assign Congress sole authority over laws related to foreign citizens' admission into the United States.
Moreover, Jadwat highlighted that lower courts have upheld this precedent in cases like Texas v. United States (2022) and United States v. Alabama (2012). According to him, "states cannot evade this rule by claiming they are merely stepping into the shoes of the federal government and enforcing (or reinforcing) federal laws."
In his testimony, Jadwat also defined asylum as "a form of humanitarian protection that can lead to permanent residence and eventually citizenship." He clarified that it is available 'whether or not' a noncitizen enters 'at a designated port of arrival,' and 'irrespective of such [noncitizen’s] status." Criticizing Texas' Operation Lone Star for spending $4.5 billion without effectively preventing illegal immigration, he stated, "the Texas scheme has nevertheless caused enormous harms, contributing to hundreds of injuries and deaths." Jadwat labeled Texas' claim of invasion as "nonsensical," arguing that individuals seeking asylum at the border are abiding by current U.S. laws and not attempting to overthrow the state's government.
