solved what was the Founding Father’s intent when the addressed border

what was the Founding Father’s intent when the addressed border security in early legislation and how that intent manifested or contradicted today?Course Syllabus: Border security is a crucial part of our country’s homeland security efforts; however, many do not realize its complexity. Securing the nation’s borders is a multifaceted and complex task comprised of often seemingly competing objectives that cross over multiple homeland security domains, as well as jurisdictions. This course examines the United States’ approach to securing its borders within the larger context of homeland security. Students will analyze our nation’s border security strategies, policies, agencies, coordinating structures, and the associated legal and jurisdictional authorities through which border security is effectuated. Students will also assess the various internal and external threats and hindrances to securing America’s borders that still persist. This course is designed to enhance the student’s ability to think critically about border security and our nation’s approach to securing its borders. It will equip the student with the necessary knowledge to effectively evaluate current border security strategies as well as propose policy changes related to border security in order to enhance the nation’s homeland security posture.————————Some case laws worth touching on that may assist you :United States v. Flores-MontanoThis case is one in which the defendant was arrested after approximately 81 pounds of marijuana was discovered in his vehicle’s fuel tank while he was attempting to enter the United States through an established port of entry. At the heart of this case is the level of suspicion needed by the government to conduct searches at the border. The information provided in this case will further your understanding of the balance between individual Constitutional rights and government interest in providing border security.United States v. Martinez-FuerteThis case essentially reinforces the Border Patrol’s authority to operate immigration traffic checkpoints along routes of egress from the actual border. In this case, the defendant was arrested for attempting to smuggle two illegal aliens. Understanding the Supreme Court’s ruling, in this case, will help you properly frame discussion regarding this often-polarized aspect of border security. Almeida-Sanchez v. United StatesThis 1973 Supreme Court case set the level of suspicion required for Border Patrol Agents to make traffic stops away from the border, at places other than traffic checkpoints. It also, established what could be considered a functional equivalent of the border. The information, in this case, is critical to understanding a key limitation of an important Border Patrol function; conducting roving vehicle stops.United States v. Montoya de HernandezThis case involves a woman convicted of smuggling cocaine inside her body while attempting to enter the United States at an established port of entry. The U.S. Supreme Court’s final decision demonstrates the difference in the level of suspicion required for border security personnel to conduct searches and/or detain individuals at designated ports of entry or their functional equivalents and areas away from the border.8 U.S. Code § 1357 – Powers of Immigration Officers and EmployeesTitle 8 of the United States Code, Section 1357 outlines the powers and authorities of immigration officers, including the authority to make arrests, administer oaths, detain aliens, conduct searches, and other law enforcement functions pertaining to immigration law or other federal laws. This information will increase your understanding of the authority by which CBP law enforcement personnel perform their required duties.