but the solution very well could be.
At the end of the day, all those groups have one thing in common. They are not Americans. They are not legal Residents (notice the capital). As you mentioned, our Constitution is very clear that regardless of documented status, they are afforded rights. I'm not arguing against that. That would be wrong.
As I mentioned. Two different attributes that need to be addressed. Stemming the flow....dealing with who's here. Different actions in each attribute.
~Jeordam
To legal outsiders it looks like a distinction without a difference, but to legal insiders there is a difference. Due Process, Substantive Due Process, etc, etc (more legal terms I do not care to debate the precise meaning.) Not even Scalia and Thomas agreed on these things and thus you can't make the claim it is "the original" X with X being understanding, or something is clear as day, so on and so on.
Cringes whenever you use this idiom (you have used it twice now). This is very loaded term from a historical perspective. I do not know if you recognize the images you summon in other people's mind when you use this idiom. Furthermore we do not all see the same images due to our different histories, it is a loaded term. Even if its a very pretty / artful phrase.
(Plays with the puns) it is a real "Frankenstein" of an idiom.