I’m not arguing with you that there needs to be enforcement. So long as the state turns over those found to be here illegally to the ICE, then I have no issues with this.
The state, however, cannot violate citizen rights in order to investigate those who are here illegally. Fr’nstance, can’t pull someone over randomly without having some indication of illegal status.
Nor do they have the authority to deport those here illegally. The federal government issues the visas and so the enforcement of the visas and their issuance falls on them.
As for quotas, I don’t believe that there’s any requirement, for or against quotas. There’s nothing constitutionally that requires quotas, and in fact for the majority of the time of the republic, the nation had no quotas whatsoever.
Certain countries, Canada, fr’nstance, permits the provinces themselves to have some control over their own immigration. The same is not true of the states.
The real issue is the "judgment" of what constitutes a visa ~ and the idea is that since the federales create the visas they can read them ~ hence the use of the e-verify system for employment questions.
What we have going on today regarding those not lawfully here is a "customary practice" where a state hands them over to ICE and you will soon discover, I think, that a "customary practice" without clear cut constitutional backing an be dealt with by a state independent of federal authority. After all, think about it a second ~ if you need a visa to be an immigrant and you don't have a visa, then you are what? Are you a tourist? Where's your visa for that. Are you a student? Where's your visa for that. Are you a diplomat? Let's see your visa.
With no visa just what do you think you are doing?