Petitioner does not come into federal court claiming that she met that precondition, and that the State Department's conclusion to the contrary was factually in error. Judicial power over immigration and naturalization is extremely limited. Because only Congress has the power to set the requirements for acquisition of citizenship by persons not born within the territory of the United States, federal courts cannot exercise that power under the guise of their remedial authority. Pangilinan , supra, at 885. An alien who seeks political rights as a member of this Nation can rightfully obtain them only upon terms and conditions specified by Congress.
Courts are without authority to sanction changes or modifications.
But a unitary statute is not to be picked apart in this fashion. We do not, however, read statutory provisions in isolation, as if other provisions in the same Act do not exist, see King v. That assumes, however, a judicial power to sever the unconstitutional portion from the remainder, and to apply the remainder unencumbered. I know of no instance, however, in which this Court has severed an unconstitutional restriction upon the grant of immigration or citizenship. Another obstacle to judicial deletion of the challenged requirements is the fact that when a statutory violation of equal protection has occurred, it is not foreordained which particular statutory provision is invalid.