THE EVOLUTION OF THE LEGAL STATUS OF IMMIGRANTS BASED ON AN ANALYSIS OF SELECTED OPINIONS OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

A careful analysis of the American immigration law points at two important tendencies. First, the directions for regulations concerning immigrants have been mainly formed on the federal level, while the state regulations had to accord with the rules established by the Congress. If the Supreme Court determined the constitutional range of guarantees granted to immigrants, it mainly decided on the division of competences then in force between the state and federal governments. Second, the interpretation of immigration law has depended on political factors, often described as ideological. On one had, these have been in line with the general direction of U.S. politics, on the other hand, they could have been subject to a more liberal or conservative approach to the scope of protecting immigrants' rights The aim of this paper is to depict the above-mentioned tendencies by means of an analysis of selected opinions of the United States Supreme Court, which due to their precedent character confirmed the direction of the state's policy concerning the status of immigrants. It is worth researching whether and how did the liberal or conservative sentiments of the Supreme Court Judges as well as the political interest of the governing administration affect the interpretations of the constitutional status of legal and illegal immigrants. For the purpose of this analysis over 30 opinions of the Supreme Court have been chosen. which in the author's opinion constitute the fundamental research material for evaluating the directions in which the constitution had been interpreted regarding the immigration of the American state